- Home >
- Services >
- Access to Knowledge >
- Trend Monitor >
- Domain of Application >
- Trend snippet: The use of algorithmic profiling and targeting in job-related advertising might reinforce existing patterns of discrimination in the labour market
Trends in Security Information
The HSD Trendmonitor is designed to provide access to relevant content on various subjects in the safety and security domain, to identify relevant developments and to connect knowledge and organisations. The safety and security domain encompasses a vast number of subjects. Four relevant taxonomies (type of threat or opportunity, victim, source of threat and domain of application) have been constructed in order to visualize all of these subjects. The taxonomies and related category descriptions have been carefully composed according to other taxonomies, European and international standards and our own expertise.
In order to identify safety and security related trends, relevant reports and HSD news articles are continuously scanned, analysed and classified by hand according to the four taxonomies. This results in a wide array of observations, which we call ‘Trend Snippets’. Multiple Trend Snippets combined can provide insights into safety and security trends. The size of the circles shows the relative weight of the topic, the filters can be used to further select the most relevant content for you. If you have an addition, question or remark, drop us a line at info@securitydelta.nl.
visible on larger screens only
Please expand your browser window.
Or enjoy this interactive application on your desktop or laptop.
The use of algorithmic profiling and targeting in job-related advertising might reinforce existing patterns of discrimination in the labour market
Finally, the use of algorithmic profiling and targeting in the advertising of job-related adverts might reinforce existing patterns of discrimination in the labour market. An empirical study showed that employment ads distributed by Facebook with settings geared towards a neutral distribution ended up reaching an audience composed of 85 % women for cashier positions in supermarkets, while ads for taxi driver positions reached a 75 % Black audience and ads for lumberjack positions reached an audience that was 90 % male and 72 % white.187 This form of stereotyping in the exposure to job adverts risks reinforcing structural inequality. While advertising is clearly excluded from the scope of the Gender Goods and Services Directive, as will be examined in the next section, advertising in relation to job positions seems to fall within the scope of access to employment. The algorithmic targeting of employment ads, if discriminatory on grounds of gender, race, age, disability, sexual orientation or religion or belief, could indeed be captured by Article 14(1)(a) of the Gender Recast Directive and Article 3(1)(a) of the Racial Equality Directive and the Framework Directive, which indicate that the prohibition of discrimination applies to ‘conditions for access to employment […] including selection criteria and recruitment conditions’. This can be confirmed by drawing an analogy with the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice in relation to discrimination on grounds of race and sexual orientation, which is also covered by EU law on equal access to employment. In Feryn, Accept and Associazione Avvocatura per i diritti LGBTI, the CJEU ruled that deterring job applicants from protected groups from applying to given job positions was to be considered discrimination, even where no recruitment process was on-going.188 The lack of, or reduced, advertising of, given jobs to a protected group could thus be considered discrimination if it in effect undermines the objective of EU law in terms of guaranteeing equal access to the labour market.189