Live data from Hacker News

Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election

washingtonpost.com

31–40 of 171 posts

Re: Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election

#31
As it is rarely mentioned in the US media, I'd just note that the US pretty openly interferes in Russian elections, and has been doing so for a long time. It's curious this is virtually never mentioned amidst all the accusations of Russia involving itself in US elections.

There are many tentacles to the US octopus, for starters you can look at an organization created by and funded by the US congress, the soi disant National Endowment for Democracy. They have a conference opening next week containing some of the people the US has been using to interfere in Russian elections ( https://www.ned.org/events/prospects-for-russias-democratic-... ).

Re: Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election

#32
post #2

Facebook's blog post on the matter: https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2017/09/information-operations-...

... and they do this while the were openly taking money from Russian/KGB campaigners round 2010, dispatching campaign consultants and overall trreating them as first tier clients. Same was true of Google in Russia, while they still had hopes of somehow greasing hands with the establishment. They evacuated the most valuable staff out of Russia around 2015 to Switzerland, when they finally gave up. I still do remember them quitely delisting online resources with corruption exposures circa 2007, that were reappearing with simple reversal of word order.

They may've been just "probing where the water is shallow" in 2010 with "seemingly innocent" think tank drivel and consulting buys, and then went full throttle when it did matter the most.

American top C-Levels, officials, 3 letter agency employees, and other American beau monde all have that "smart, sophisticated, brilliant, but damn naive" note in their personalities. All such types do remind me of people who are "trying to win in a casino," while having "I know what I'm doing" look on their face. They can't win there, it not their league.

To prevail, Americans need to overhaul their political establishment and institutes of power with virtuous and competent people.

If I was the US congress, I would've put it very square, if a dot com like FB actively conspires with Russians, and then pretends that they didn't, then everybody along the chain of command down to founders, c-levels, and major financiers (with their own respective boards) are detained, subject to criminal prosecution and given prison sentences

Re: Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election

#34
post #26
post #19

Why would Facebook discriminate where ad $ revenue is coming from? Twitter, Instagram, doesn't matter, money is money.

Because foreign agents buying political ads violates US federal law

>Because foreign agents buying political ads violates US federal law

WRONG. Nothing prohibits foreign entities from buying their own political ads.

http://fortune.com/2017/07/12/us-election-meddling-online-ad...

Re: Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election

#35
This is likely just the tip of the digital advertising iceberg with all of this for FB and other advertising giants like Google and Twitter. According to this Wired article[1] Giles-Parscale, the agency behind a lot of the Trump election digital efforts "took in some $90 million, the vast majority of which went toward buying Facebook ads for the campaign."

A Reddit user who "was working at the other end of this pipeline that is selling digital adspace to consulting firms" (according to his post) also posted some very detailed insights as to how funds might have been laundered into clean political donations via small agencies and PACs in the US via digital media buys.

Here's his follow-up post from three months ago which has more info and links to his original post--really worth reading all of it, his original post, the subsequent threads, etc.: https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/6alzm0/fbi_confirm...

So the issue is less about ads purchased directly from Russia or by illegitimate companies with Russian IPs or anything of the sort as FB addressed in this statement. That is a drop in the bucket compared to the dollar amounts that might have been spent as part of the rest of the Trump media buys. The bigger story may actually be more about Russian (and other funds) funneled through small legit digital agencies and PACs (or through Parscale) in the US who then did ad buys driving for Trump donations which he was then able to legally use as campaign funds (or for enriching himself as the Reddit user hypothesizes).

There are likely FB sales reps and others there who have some insight into the ad campaign objectives, targeting details, and the source of that targeting data. The last bit is interesting there because it is still not fully understood how Cambridge Analytica plugged into all of this, and how they obtained their detailed targeting data. Mercer and Bannon both have direct Cambridge Analytica ties[2].

All of this is to say that I don't think the full story is being unearthed with these data points that FB shared. And I'd be willing to bet that FB sales reps who dealt with these accounts during the election know quite a bit more about what actually went on. However we may never know how deep the rabbit hole really goes, how dirty such funds might actually be, or how much FB, Google and Twitter really profited from the election (and ongoing campaigns).

I want to conclude this by stating that I am just posting my own personal thoughts based on a variety of articles and Reddit posts, and I don't purport to have any inside insight into these companies operations beyond my fairly deep experience in the online advertising space and my understanding of how that operates, so this is largely speculation and you should come to your own conclusions. That said, it is hardly outside the realm of possibility at this point to imagine how this sort of scheme could work, and how all of the players involved might have had strong financial incentives to not rock the boat.

[1] https://www.wired.com/story/trump-russia-data-parscale-faceb...

[2] http://www.newsweek.com/did-russians-target-dem-voters-kushn...

Re: Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election

#36
post #16

I guess Citizens United doesn't just apply to citizens.

Citizens United was a good ruling because Congress and both political parties have been doing their damn best to limit the number of ways money can get into politics unless it is to them.

How? Simple, donations under $200 per person do not need be revealed until they exceed that number. Also taking foreign donations without proper tracking and the ease of generating new cc numbers / names works as well. However the number one method they use is exploiting campaign fundraising events where they can rake in millions. With the clout and friends in business how can a third party or anyone compete against it?

So while there are issues with money in politics all attempts to limit it have simply been done to protect the two parties who hold near absolute power.

Re: Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election

#37
post #19

Why would Facebook discriminate where ad $ revenue is coming from? Twitter, Instagram, doesn't matter, money is money.

Well, first, there's law prohibiting foreign-sponsored activity of this sort, and prohibits assisting foreign parties in violating the prohibition.

And, second, they were channelled through false-flag accounts and pages, which violates Facebook's policies regarding authenticity.

Re: Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election

#38

As it is rarely mentioned in the US media, I'd just note that the US pretty openly interferes in Russian elections, and has been doing so for a long time. It's curious this is virtually never mentioned amidst all the accusations of Russia involving itself in US elections. There are many tentacles to the US octopus, for starters you can look at an organization created by and funded by the US congress, the soi disant N…

> virtually never mentioned

I (anecdotally) hear this tidbit in every comments section relating to Russia's involvement in the U.S. election. Almost as if it's a common talking point.

Reminds me a lot of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

EDIT: ... And so a conversation was effectively derailed and nothing was gained. Arguing about the validity of Whataboutism or who is doing it isn't the point. It's a deflection technique that works in spite of you calling it out.

Re: Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election

#40
post #26
post #19

Why would Facebook discriminate where ad $ revenue is coming from? Twitter, Instagram, doesn't matter, money is money.

Because foreign agents buying political ads violates US federal law

and if that Russian company was an agent of Russian government ( 101 chances out of 100 that it was, i.e. any reasonable person would think so :) then FB doing that company's bidding was acting as an agent of Russian government, and doing so without registration as such a foreign government agent sounds to me (not a lawyer though) like a violation of another item of the federal law. At least it looks like doing such thing was a violation before the current administration - now they seem to accept "retroactive" registrations, at least from their own folks - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-trump-campaig...
Post reply on HN