81–90 of 1001 posts
Is this when we now start to wonder what will count as a political ad? Social movements that have a political connection / associated with a particular party or candidate?
Politics don't go away just because you ontologize them as "private sector".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A post from the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21380985 A user who works in digital advertising said they do the following: > You don't take money from clients who are representing/selling anything other than goods or services. You evaluate creative & landing pages for each and every campaign. It's extremely simple. Seems like a mostly good solution. I guess you could still sell political services an…
So does that mean some group like the American Cancer Society can't advertise?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't really criticise twitter for this - last year they were all ready to launch a way to embed text posts in a tweet like images can currently be embedded in a tweet, until the userbase revolted and they had to cancel the plan.
Really? The twitter userbase actually prefers it this way? That's baffling to me. Did the revolting userbase provide any reasons or explanations for this preference?
Annoyingly, Facebook decided that I was advertising Political content, and therefor requires a whole series of additional verification steps, as well as a disclaimer of the fashion "Payed for By _______" right beneath my ad.
Needless to say, it gives my advertisement a feel which I don't think it should have. It's not a political advertisement. Nor is it about a political, or social issue. Nor does it promote anything - campaign, legislation, or otherwise.
It's an ad, for an app, that provides access to data in a totally unbiased (and unaltered) way.
TLDR; These companies are casting a really wide net in the wake of the election ads scandal. Unfortunately, some people are getting targeted who (IMO) shouldn't be and there's ZERO recourse. No phone number to call, no rep I can explain things to, nothing. I appealed the decision and it was - no joke - instantly denied. If twitter is anything like Facebook, this means I can no longer advertise my app on twitter. Lame.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't really criticise twitter for this - last year they were all ready to launch a way to embed text posts in a tweet like images can currently be embedded in a tweet, until the userbase revolted and they had to cancel the plan.
Really? The twitter userbase actually prefers it this way? That's baffling to me. Did the revolting userbase provide any reasons or explanations for this preference?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can also get an army of real actual people to spread your message and the company can just ban them and accuse them of being bots or having ties to some government without actual evidence.
Your comment is written in a way that implies that this happens. Do you have evidence to back that up? Not evidence that they take down suspected state-sponsored brigading, but that they were wrong?
I think his comment his written to imply that it is possible for this to happen. In which case, it does not require supporting evidence beyond the logical consistency of itself, which is sound, I believe.
"Bots" are such a boogeyman on Twitter, usually from older folks that just don't understand the nature of the internet. I've seen threads where completely legitimate people are accused of being "bots." If the problem were so extreme, it would be much more pronounced. It's incredibly hard to police, and it happens on every single platform.
"Bots" are such a boogeyman on Twitter, usually from older folks that just don't understand the nature of the internet. I've seen threads where completely legitimate people are accused of being "bots." If the problem were so extreme, it would be much more pronounced. It's incredibly hard to police, and it happens on every single platform.