So, Facebook stops racially targeted ads. The new rule targets ads about credit, housing and employment.? On the surface, that sounds like a good thing. But is it really?
In addition to this new rule, Facebook advertisers must swear they’ll never use discriminatory ads. Also, these rules took place after congressional meetings, with organizations like the Congressional Black Caucus and Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Some civil rights leaders worry ethnic based ads will lead to housing and job discrimination. This is especially true for markets that are notoriously known for discrimination practices. Here is what also concerns many people: These ads could encourage discrimination.
Some federal officials accuse Facebook for enabling advertisers to exclude groups while placing ads. For example, Pro Publica placed a controversial ad. This particular ad promoted an event that excluded non-white buyers. That concerned many political and civil rights leaders. While Facebook uses multicultural marketing to cater to all races, this shouldn’t be an excuse or license to discrimination. Soon afterwards, some filed a lawsuit against Facebook. They claimed such ads violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Fair Housing Act of 1968. Facebook listened. They talked with housing rights organizations. Thus, this new rules is in effect. Many in Congress and in various communities applaud the new ruling.
So do I. But I do so with caution. There is no excuse for discrimination. If this ruling fights discrimination, then good. But this could hurt diverse marketing practices as well. Suppose someone puts up a housing ad. It’s toward a certain audience. What if someone cries discrimination? In the politically correct era, I can see someone playing that card. But let’s take this further. Look at Facebook’s employee roster. Less than five percent are African-American. Less than five percent of Facebook’s work force are Latino. Shouldn’t this be Facebook’s next concern?
Thank goodness it’s over now. Thank goodness the most contentious election in American history is over. But Silicon Valley, mostly Hilary Clinton supporters, aren’t taking it so well. Let’s see how Silicon Valley’s handling the election.
But some expressed hope.? Technology consultant Jeff Morris Jr. called Trump’s victory a wake up call for Silicon Valley. John Lilly serves on Code for Americs’a Board of Directors. He’s the former CEO of Mozilla Corp. Lilly encouraged his fellow techies to work hard and keep their heads up. While other Silicon Valley leads urge and preach defiance. I’ve read some celebrities say if Trump wins, they’re moving to Canada. But don’t tell that to Anil Dash. He tweeted, “…and not afraid of Donal Trump. We have to get to work.”
Finally, there’s Peter Thiel. He’s the co-founder of Pay Pal. Thiel? is an ally to pro wrestling legend Hulk Hogan. He’s virtually the only Silicon Valley Trump supporter. If they’re others, they don’t admit it. Thiel congratulated Trump on last night’s victory. In addition, he urges all Americans to come together and face America’s problems. I don’t agree with Thiel’s politics. But he has a point. All of us, including the technology community, need to come together now. We need to improve diversity in Silicon Valley. Let’s work together to bring tech jobs back to America. Most of all, if we’re going to compete in the world, make tech education a top priority. But let’s start while they’re in early elementary school. Don’t wait until they’re in high school or college. Give our young kids the tools to succeed and prosper now. What can Silicon Valley do to move forward?
History is made today. And the bickering and hate is almost over; we can only hope. Because today is US Election Day. Personally, I want to bury myself in Netflix and I’ll hear who won tomorrow morning. But since some of you are gluttons for stress and punishment, here is where you can follow election coverage online.
Since so many Americans are on You Tube, why not start there? Several You Tube channels will keep election coverage going all night long. Such channels include MTV, Bloomberg, NBC, Telemondo, Info Wars, and Young Turks. Also, Twitter will stream BuzzFeed’s election coverage starting at 6pm Eastern, 5pm Central and 3pm Pacific. This is just the start.
Because we know Facebook wants in. Which is why CNN, ABC News, New York Times, PBS, and others will stream election coverage through them. In addition to that, most of us have smartphone apps. Many news apps, including Fox News, CBSN, C-Span, Politico, Vice, Slate, and several others will offer coverage. Google and Bing will share polling data as soon as the polls close. In fact, do you know where your polling station is? If not, Google can help you with that as well. You can even watch election results through VR technology.
So there you have it. But what about us who actually want to keep our sanity? Thank goodness for the Weather Channel. Starting at 3pm Eastern, the Weather Channel will offer you 9 hours of ‘chill marathon‘. This includes nature scenery and smooth jazz. Of course, You Tube has thousands upon thousands of non-election channels for your escape. If America needed a ‘Netflix and chill’ night, it’s tonight. If you’re trying to escape the election coverage, Facebook is NOT the place to do so. My FB friends are obsessed with this election. I’m guessing many of yours are too. That’s why I’m not logging on Facebook for the next week or so. What are some other places you can follow election coverage? What are some other places you can escape election coverage?
China has one of the fastest growing economies in the world. It also has one of the strictest censorship laws in the world. In addition to that, they just passed another online censorship law. Could China’s online censorship cripple business?
So effective November 7, China signs a new cyber security law. It tightens the noose on online companies and how they operate. It requires online companies to register customers’ real names and real personal information. Also, it blocks ‘prohibited’ content. Furthermore, they require localized data within the Chinese borders. But that’s not all. Companies must report all network security issues to the government. It doesn’t matter if they can fix it on their own. And another thing: Companies are to provide tech support during government investigations, whether they want to or not. There are other laws too.
So you know the global response is swift and harsh. An advocacy group called Human Rights Watch vehemently opposes China’s new measures. They complain the law isn’t clear enough. The international group says this puts hundreds of millions under stricter state control. But it gets worse. This new law forbids certain content. One illegal phrase includes, “overthrowing the socialist system”. That tells me something. That should tell you something. In China, many have a computer, tablet and smartphone. Also, many have all of the above. Many in the country love their social media, and now they have to watch what they say? Isn’t this bad for business?
The Human Rights Watch is on point. These laws are vague. When laws are vague, they can be twisted. For example: ‘Overthrowing the socialist system’ could mean anything anti-Chinese government. That’s a problem. Can you imagine a law like that here? I can’t . I hope I never have to.? But what about the big companies who work in China? What about Apple, Microsoft, Google, Samsung, and other tech giants who depend on China’s growth? It’s no secret these companies are in deep with the Chinese government. So what will they do? Will they use their power to fight such oppressive laws? Or will they give in to the Chinese government just to keep their bottom line in tact? What would you do?
The Democrat Party was hacked last summer. This was during the Democrat National Convention. You’re also familiar with Wikileaks releasing condemning emails about presidential candidate Hilary Clinton. For months, everyone assumed Russia did it. Maybe it wasn’t Russia after all.
Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange tells a different story. According to Assange, Russia has no involvement. Neither does Moscow or Russian president Vladimir Putin. Alternative news site RT follows this story. On this site, veteran reporter John Pilger interviews Assange. In the interview, he calls Russian involvement in the hacking ‘fictional’. Assange also denied Wikileaks played a role. Assange says the allegations further promoted anti-Russian hysteria. But on the other hand Assange says, “I actually feel quite sorry for Clinton as a person…”
Hacking plagued the Hilary Clinton campaign for months. Around March 2016, Wikileaks got 30,000 emails from Mrs. Clinton’s private server. Furthermore, 20,000 emails leaked out. These emails exposed a bad attitude toward Bernie Sanders. But what happened last month was the ultimate nail. Wikileaks released over 50,000 emails. They’re connected to John Podesta, Bill Clinton’s former Chief of Staff. But now, this batch of emails has everybody in the hot seat. These emails also erased Mrs. Clinton’s comfortable lead in the polls.
Therefore, I don’t know who to trust. Here at Computer Geeks our Managed Services regularly detect hacking attempts. ?IT Support sees everything and it’s scary. ?Maybe Russia had nothing to do with the hackings. Maybe Assange had nothing to do with it. But I love the way (I mean this with the utmost sarcasm) the media spun this around. Everybody, especially mainstream media, made Russia look like the villain in all this. Even I’ve written blogs that went that way. So if I misled you that way, I sincerely apologize. It turns out Moscow may not have hacked into the any of the emails. But if they didn’t, then who did? Managed Services allows us to trace where hackers are from but even then a good hacker can make it look like thy’re from Russia when they’re not. ?These thousands of emails didn’t just fall on Assange’s desk or sneak by IT Support. So where did they come from? And who can we trust?
So far this decade, smartphone apps open doors for business and communication. But sometimes, they can open the door for racial discrimination and hatred. Airbnb wrestles with this. So are ride-hailing apps. Do ride-hailing apps enable discrimination?
According to university research (MIT, Stanford, Univ. of Washington), the answer is a disturbing yes. Research shows in Boston, Uber drivers cancel rides for men with Black sounding names. Black men are four times more likely to suffer this than any other race or gender. Research shows in Seattle, Black riders face longer wait times than White customers. That’s because it’s harder to find drivers willing to take Black passengers.
To their credit, Uber and Lyft do all they can to combat these trends. A Lyft spokesperson says Lyft will continue to provide affordable, comfortable rides for all. She makes it clear discrimination is not Lyft’s practice. Rachel Holt is Uber’s head of North American operations. She addressed the study. In an email, Holt stated discrimination has no place in Uber. Furthermore, Holt says this study was helpful in fighting discrimination. Also, researchers suggest ways to combat racism. They suggest names and photos not be identified. But on the flip side, some argue names and faces offer a friendlier experience. So what do we do?
First of all, don’t let cabbies off the hook either. Some are notorious for passing a potential black customer just to serve a white customer. As a man of color myself, I experience this sometimes. You see, we don’t have an app problem. We don’t have a cab problem. As a result, what we have a a problem with the human heart. Yes, Uber and Lyft needs to do all they can to fight discrimination, just like Airbnb needs to fight it. But it’s obvious this problem won’t end with laws and legislation. I urge all Uber and Lyft drivers and Airbnb hosts to think before you act. Think before you refuse service to anybody. Please think before you hate or discriminate against anyone. What message are you sending? Would you want that done to you?
