Live data from Hacker News

Twitter to ban political advertising

twitter.com

651–660 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#651
post #30

One of the key aspects of political content on social media is that you don't necessarily need to buy ads to get your message in front of people. You can instead pay for an army of bots to spread your message and make it appear as genuine user generated content rather than a prepackaged advertisement. So while this decision by Twitter is in my opinion good, what are they doing to cut down on inauthentic political eng…

https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/15/twitter-world-leaders-brea...

He’s blocking that too

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#652
post #30

One of the key aspects of political content on social media is that you don't necessarily need to buy ads to get your message in front of people. You can instead pay for an army of bots to spread your message and make it appear as genuine user generated content rather than a prepackaged advertisement. So while this decision by Twitter is in my opinion good, what are they doing to cut down on inauthentic political eng…

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.

https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/15/twitter-world-leaders-brea...

He controls it all

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#653
post #57

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?

https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/15/twitter-world-leaders-brea...

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#654
post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CNN rejecting Trump ads is akin to Fox rejecting Warren ads given how they are politically aligned. Facebook is trying to be neutral here and let people (and journalists who will write on such ads) decide vs. trying to come in with their own judgment. This has been happening on TV/Print ads for decades now.

It is still shocking to me that in 2019 people still view Fox News and CNN as having anywhere close a mirror level of political bias.

The funny thing is that I don't know which way you are shocked. If they aren't mirror-biased, which one is more biased?

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree with what you're saying about the difficulty of cleanly separating political vs nonpolitical speech, but for specifically the case of U.S. political issues, one could imagine a hack of defining political ads as "anything that would need to be reported to the FEC as an expenditure."

> one could imagine a hack of defining political ads as "anything that would need to be reported to the FEC as an expenditure." That misses a whole bunch of political advertising. Most of it, I'd wager.

Independent political action committees (both PACs and Super PACs) need to report their spending to the FEC, tied to the candidate their independent expenditure is in favor of/support.

That covers most political spending on the national level. Political spending for state offices (which dont have to report to the FEC) is a whole other story.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"binary judgement of truth" I think people should be more comfortable with non-binary truth, based on the likelihood that something is a lie or not based on historical record. I would put more trust in a statement from someone with a record of telling unbiased truth versus someone with a record of frequently spewing lies or having ingrained bias. Otherwise, if you don't make these types of initial simplifications, it…

>comfortable with non-binary truth Careful, getting a bit too postmodernists in here. If you look at it too hard all "truths" become false eventually, and that can pave the way to apathy. >And it's okay to be make a mistaken evaluation, just reevaluate and adjust the simplified "truth" assessment model based on more recent data. And how many politicians on both sides of the aisle double-down on an issue just to remai…

"If you look at it too hard all "truths" become false eventually"

My opinion is that many apathetic people become that way because of being treated unfairly (in their view) or feeling helpless, and way less people become that way because of thinking too hard.

"Or worse, change their position thanks to millions of dollars ..."

Well, I see new data: lobbying $$$ that could make a previously trusted politician biased. Time to update my simplistic model on his related political ads to being less likely to true. There might be another politician who changed positions based on new or emerging body of evidence - maybe this person is more trustworthy this time. New data -> updated evaluation.

"the masses believe the lie, doesn't it become the truth"

I'm not familiar with post-modernism or Stoicism. But I sure hope that the proportion of people who believe one thing does not ultimately determine its truthfulness. The way I would initially simplify this is to rely on the likely proportion of unbiased people who hold one position versus the opposite. And by unbiased, I simplify that by not trusting greedy people, or people who have not studied the policy or history of it or other places who've tried different approaches. I think these initial simplifications will already cut down many viewpoints and voices that I do not need hear, in order to make an informed voting decision.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#657
post #654
post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is still shocking to me that in 2019 people still view Fox News and CNN as having anywhere close a mirror level of political bias.

The funny thing is that I don't know which way you are shocked. If they aren't mirror-biased, which one is more biased?

Fox News obviously.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#658
post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for not down voting me — but I’d love you just the same if you did. I find it difficult to rebut the argument you present with the following exception: in the US we have several hundred years of rigorous iteration in our legal system with respect to what is and what isn’t protected speech. For twitter to decide now and it this juncture that the speech it most dislikes is x, something about that doesn’t sit…

That sounds sensible, and I'd agree with you that Twitter's decision does raise questions about who gets to decide what's allowed to have "reach". I suppose your parent comment sounded a bit too incendiary for civilized discussion. It did seem somewhat reductionist to say the "elites" are banning free speech to control the narrative. It's possible that Twitter is biased in favor of certain political leanings; it coul…

>> It did seem somewhat reductionist to say the "elites" are banning free speech to control the narrative.

Here’s a hypothetical to illustrate how this makes sense in my view: the incumbent is always going to control the lions share of the so called free media. Two or three elections cycles ago, the average campaign didn’t know about a/b testing much less how to leverage social to level the playing field. Now everyone knows... now the incumbent no longer has the home field advantage... except.. twitter just changed the rules. One less platform that the challenger can leverage to play up to the incumbent. And let’s see, everyone thinks Jack is great so maybe some of the other platforms follow on... now technology is basically useless for the challenger.. so we are back to the old system where the incumbent takes the free media attention. A return to the status quo. Now why would social media have an interest in that? Oh I don’t know why does anyone have an interest in seeing entrenched politicians staying in power and yet that’s the system we’ve made for ourselves... oh I know pac money / citizens united are all code for republican money so I’m sure a lot of the commentators on here are thinking this will suppress that because that is the “only people who buy political ads” these days... but I’d ask you this - what if some challenger out there might have a chance of flipping a red state and changing the composition of the senate in 2020... except now one of the tools they could have used just disappeared... how do you feel now? Maybe political ads aren’t so bad if they keep incumbents from sticking around so long.

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#659

"We considered stopping only candidate ads, but issue ads present a way to circumvent. Additionally, it isn’t fair for everyone but candidates to buy ads for issues they want to push. So we're stopping these too." - Jack Dorsey So... what is the definition of an issue?

Twitter’s Vijaya Gadde tweeted a reply to someone who asked this question: “hi - here's our current definition: 1/ Ads that refer to an election or a candidate, or 2/ Ads that advocate for or against legislative issues of national importance (such as: climate change, healthcare, immigration, national security, taxes)”

Re: Twitter to ban political advertising

#660
This is certainly, on the surface, a great leveling of the influence between oligarchical interests and the people. I'm hopeful it will play out that way. I suspect that the oligarchs will simply redouble their efforts on buying bots and influencers instead of clearly marked adverts.

This is certainly more expensive for them, more uncertain, and more likely to blow up in their faces if someone is determined to have been paid. Certainly it may also reduce attainable reach.

It's difficult to see how this will play out even though the alternative strategy is obvious. Hopefully the people will chalk some advantage.

EDIT: As others have noted, corporations, which are inherently right wing, will still be able to promote their messaging, so there is some disadvantage to the left. Marketing pay-day loans? That's a right wing exploitative program for example.

Post reply on HN