Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We posed as 100 Senators to run ads on Facebook. Facebook approved all of them

news.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 353 posts

Re: We posed as 100 Senators to run ads on Facebook. Facebook approved all of them

#51

Post by bluecalm »

hadrien01 wrote: post #40
lucio wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should we do the same with TV and billboards? >Plus, less money raised and spent by political campaigns.

That's how it's done in my country, France: candidates can't pay for political ads. They have equally-sized and free-to-use billboards in front of public buildings [0] and a free one-minute-and-a-half-per-day ad space on public television [1]. That's it. [0] http://dspagnou.celeonet.fr/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/degra... [1] For fun, the 2017 ads: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n__Il8Z7lrg

Can they pay for their own website? What about a website about their ideas? What about linking to that website? Limiting speech like that sounds dystopian. It's sure great for established players though as they are already known and get a lot of air time anyway while the competition can't even pay to try to convince others to their ideas.

Re: We posed as 100 Senators to run ads on Facebook. Facebook approved all of them

#52

Post by jdminhbg »

taurath wrote: post #47
hoorayimhelping wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For varying definitions of best. We have the first amendment in America. It says the government can't make laws that limit a private citizen's ability to express themselves (among other things). That includes their political advertising. This is a really dangerous / slippery precedent to set, and the whole "we should change longstanding laws to deal with a problem that feels like a local maximum" is something that ma…

If Facebook is to be the public square, then it needs all the protections and consequences that come with it. You can’t say you’re a senator on a TV ad - that’s impersonating an elected official which is a plenty reasonable curb on free speech - just as you can’t walk around with a police officers uniform. There is SOME limit to speech in terms of fraud.

That's fine, but it depends on the value of you in "You can't say you're a senator." Is Vice liable for fraud here? Facebook?

And don't forget, the OP is responding to GP proposing simply banning political ads on Facebook altogether, not simply fraudulent ones.

Re: We posed as 100 Senators to run ads on Facebook. Facebook approved all of them

#53

Post by yayana »

andrewflnr wrote: post #27
josefresco wrote: post #5

"In announcing new transparency efforts or tools to combat foreign influence, Facebook included a caveat. “These changes will not prevent abuse entirely. We’re up against smart, creative and well-funded adversaries who change their tactics as we spot abuse,” Leathern wrote. But we believe that they will help prevent future interference in elections on Facebook. And it is why they are so important.” But posing as 100…

That's probably one of the only people they could actually be sure wasn't buying Facebook ads. Whereas a senator buying Facebook ads is, in itself, quite likely. Not really a fair comparison.

Yes, and it's also always been more important for a publisher to defend more carefully against any misrepresentation relating to their own endorsement or trademarks on their own medium, while punting to take down processes for misuse of other's trademarks, etc is mostly allowed.

Re: We posed as 100 Senators to run ads on Facebook. Facebook approved all of them

#54

Post by tracker1 »

Did they pose as third party candidates? Haven't read TFA, but do know several third party candidates that were petitioning for ballot support that had huge issues with getting ads approved, even for pages/accounts that were approved.

Re: We posed as 100 Senators to run ads on Facebook. Facebook approved all of them

#55

Post by dragonwriter »

tracker1 wrote: post #54

Did they pose as third party candidates? Haven't read TFA, but do know several third party candidates that were petitioning for ballot support that had huge issues with getting ads approved, even for pages/accounts that were approved.

> Did they pose as third party candidates?

Well, independent candidates at least, since they posed as all 100 current Senators, which includes 2 independents.

Re: We posed as 100 Senators to run ads on Facebook. Facebook approved all of them

#57

Post by zallarak »

Unpopular opinion: who cares? I think the business is gross, and I have not had a Facebook account for 10 years. If you disapprove of it, just don't use it. Complaining about Facebook's actions is like complaining about sugar being unhealthy. Don't force sugar to change its molecular composition, just stop eating it.

Re: We posed as 100 Senators to run ads on Facebook. Facebook approved all of them

#58

Post by tracker1 »

jdminhbg wrote: post #52
taurath wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Facebook is to be the public square, then it needs all the protections and consequences that come with it. You can’t say you’re a senator on a TV ad - that’s impersonating an elected official which is a plenty reasonable curb on free speech - just as you can’t walk around with a police officers uniform. There is SOME limit to speech in terms of fraud.

That's fine, but it depends on the value of you in "You can't say you're a senator." Is Vice liable for fraud here? Facebook? And don't forget, the OP is responding to GP proposing simply banning political ads on Facebook altogether, not simply fraudulent ones.

Fraud is already a crime. And in most cases, prosecution comes after a crime is committed. Forcing independent organizations to pre-police is generally a bad idea. It's a good idea for them to do it, it's a bad idea to use threat of force (government) to do.

In the end, I do know several third party candidates that had a lot of trouble posting genuine ads... so there's a bit of a problem all around.

Re: We posed as 100 Senators to run ads on Facebook. Facebook approved all of them

#59

Post by hadrien01 »

taurath wrote: post #48
hadrien01 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how it's done in my country, France: candidates can't pay for political ads. They have equally-sized and free-to-use billboards in front of public buildings [0] and a free one-minute-and-a-half-per-day ad space on public television [1]. That's it. [0] http://dspagnou.celeonet.fr/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/degra... [1] For fun, the 2017 ads: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n__Il8Z7lrg

How much campaigning happens on Facebook, or through Facebook groups I wonder?

As ads or promoted posts, zero. Through Facebook pages, well, quite much, with varying degrees of success. Extreme presidential candidates last year (Mélenchon for the far-left and Le Pen for the far-right) had I think the best participation numbers online, and a pretty good YouTube strategy (almost daily explanatory videos). Fringe candidates (Asselineau, Dupont-Aignan) are also quite good online. Our current president, Macron (liberal in the non-American sense of the term), also had a good online strategy, but the other candidates were forgettable at best.

You're not limited on what you can do on a political Facebook page, as long as you don't pay for promotion, respect expression rules (no defamation or hate speech), and stop campaigning two days before election day.

edit: replaced discrimination by defamation; still not sure about the translation but I think it fits more

Re: We posed as 100 Senators to run ads on Facebook. Facebook approved all of them

#60

Post by tracker1 »

ed_balls wrote: post #41
hadrien01 wrote: post #33

The best solution, and currently in effect as law in many European countries, would be to stop political ads altogether on Facebook and the Web. No more "hey who is paying for that anti-XXX political ad?", they just wouldn't exist anymore. Plus, less money raised and spent by political campaigns. Also, this article comes just one week after that one: "Facebook’s political ad tool let us buy ads “paid for” by Mike Pen…

- won't work as a free speech violation. - how would you define political?

In the end, I think that those companies that finance advertising as a non-profit or political organization should be required to have open books on who donated to that org. At least more openness can curb some of it. As it stands, nobody knows a lot of the time.
Post reply on HN