Facebook employees speak out on political ads

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/technology/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-letter.html

by otterley • 7 years ago

31 40 7 years ago

otterley14• 7 years ago

There's simply no reason why Facebook, Twitter, or any other social media company needs to be involved in the business of political campaigns. They're completely free to decline such business and refuse to run political advertisements. It's not like they'd lose much: the income they earn from political ads is a drop in the bucket, proportionally speaking.

Given the intense amount of scrutiny they're under, and their apparent inability to make clear, consistent, and sensible rules regarding their content, perhaps it would be better for them to just get out of the business altogether.

ColinWright• 7 years ago

They're completely free to decline such business and refuse to run political advertisements.

Except that if politicians want to run ads on Facebook, and Facebook declines, then politicians will, with impunity, have the power to enact laws that will damage Facebook.

People who end up in a position of power can be vindictive.

otterley14• 7 years ago

I comment about this below, but the same applies:

In this scenario, politicians and their backers would still be free to post whatever they want. But they wouldn't be able to use a paid advertisement to force their (potentially false) messages into people's News Feeds.

r00fus2• 7 years ago

Refusing to take all political money would be a no-brainer. Candidates would then just need to use the non-paid approach and organic shares.

bluGill• 7 years ago

Are they? In the US radio and TV cannot refuse such ads. I'm not sure how/if this regulation applies to Facebook (radio/tv get there because as a limited space part of their license says that have to support them), but Facebook is too big to try to thumb its nose at politicians like that. There are many ways politics can make life hard for Facebook while staying in the letter of the constitution.

Facebook when it was 100 friends from Harvard could ignore politics. Facebook with millions of users cannot.

otterley14• 7 years ago

I'm not sure how/if this regulation applies to Facebook

It doesn't.

Facebook is too big to try to thumb its nose at politicians like that.

I don't really see it as "thumbing its nose." Politicians and their backers would still be free to post whatever they want. But they wouldn't be able to use a paid advertisement to force their (potentially false) messages into people's News Feeds.

r00fus2• 7 years ago

FB ads and TV/Radio ads are not the same.

FB has organic content that politicians and their campaigns can get involved with already to the tune of millions of followers.

FB declining all political money doesn't sound like a discrimination issue.

mc32• 7 years ago

I think they are working in new territories. Their options now are allow all candidate for public office ads or refuse all of such ads. The tendency, given our 1A context would be to allow all.

But I think the Congress should step in and set the rules for how companies should govern this new territory. Not doing so leaves an important aspect of democracy in the hands of companies to make decisions for politicians.

reroute12• 7 years ago

Why should they? People can make up their own minds we don't need to restrict online advertisements. False messages appear in all other forms of advertisement, facebook or twitter is no different.

otterley14• 7 years ago

Because the potential for societal harm is arguably greater when politicians manipulate the population through falsehoods than it is by purchasing a good or service based on false advertising. And consumers have direct recourse to the law (i.e., damages) for fraud, whereas no such recourse is available to the public until re-election if they elect a politician based on falsehoods.

fiftyacorn• 7 years ago

I wish there was a way to opt out of political ads on social media

mythrwy• 7 years ago

There is a really good way!

Opt out of social media that shows stuff you don't want to see.

marktucker• 7 years ago

Facebook has major platform lock-in for me, though, since that's where all my friends are. The proper solution is to vote with your ad-blocker.

debt• 7 years ago

They don't want to exercise editorial control of their ads because "fact checking" crosses the chasm of media company vs not-a-media company.

They super duper don't want to be called a media company.

They're simply a publisher. ;)

otterley14• 7 years ago

As far as I’m aware, no such legal distinction exists. I’m not sure where you got this idea from.

gwbas1c• 7 years ago

Anyone have a link to the letter that isn't behind a paywall?

eej712• 7 years ago

It's not clear to me that one could always decide what constitutes a political ad in the first place. Sure, there is the obvious, vote for candidate X.

But what about issue advocacy ads? Are ads from an industry advocate group political? Say it was funded by the Koch brothers defending fossil fuels? Or what about an ad from the Southern Poverty Law Center to fight for disenfranchised voters? Or what about an anti-vax group looking to mobilize their base?

I don't see how its that clear cut.

otterley14• 7 years ago

Why does it have to be clear cut? Why not bias on the side of denial? Facebook doesn’t have to be a platform for paid political speech.

eej712• 7 years ago

So if planned parenthood runs an ad inviting people to join their network of supporters to protest in support of a right to abortion - would that be paid political speech in your eyes? How about if the Catholic Church runs an ad for a pro-life YouTube channel?

It's easy to say things like "not be a platform for paid political speech". I'm sure you have a clear cut line in your head and it makes sense to you. But to expect a large corporation - or some thoughtful government committee - to draw that line with any consistency or articulable principle seems incredibly naive.

gremlinsinc• 7 years ago

Maybe the government needs to A. bring back the fairness doctrine. B. Update it for ads/propaganda/social media.

Say for instance they created an agency that basically monitors/fact checks news and advertisements.

Or it could just be political ads. I think the government should enforce honesty in political ads, I mean allowing lying in political ads seems to say corruption is allowed. As lying = corruption.

Or no agency and just severe consequences/litigation for publishing/republishing 'fake news' without some sort of byline saying 'this is fake news', and dishonest political ads could also be sued against.

I mean as litigious as we are there's a gold mine for the legal industry here.

sk84life• 7 years ago

Why Facebook employees are not worried of they customers privacy..? This fake worry talk is weird to me.

Facebook employees speak out on political ads

Related Stories