11–20 of 20 posts
Facebook could just ban political advertising for a year. They don't stand to lose a lot of money, just political influence. It would be a smart move though that would shut the mouths of their rivals in the press.
Facebook could just ban political advertising for a year. They don't stand to lose a lot of money, just political influence. It would be a smart move though that would shut the mouths of their rivals in the press.
I dont think you realize how much money is in political ads.
Trump and Clinton spent $81M on US election Facebook ads in 2016
https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/01/russian-facebook-ad-spend/
and
https://www.vox.com/2018/10/23/18015228/facebook-top-politic...
I'm surprised that Warren takes this approach. Did she or her campaign really think this trough? It seems like Trump successfully turned 'fake news' into mush where people can't distinguish between different categories of speech. Even Dems get confused and can't think starting from first principles. They are asking FB to sensor political speech.
No they are asking to enforce a standard of "demonstrably false"
Religious beliefs are for me demonstrably false, for example. If I were running FB and politicians would ask me do moderate that would not fly. This could work in reverse in FoxNews controlled media. No TV-ads with climate change message for example.
From Uncle Joe's own mouth.
This seems like it's playing into the hands of political opponents who might accuse the campaign of being dishonest.
If the goal was just to make a point-- why not make some gonzo claim that virtually no one would believe and which wouldn't obviously benefit their campaign when anyone does believe it? Something along the lines of "Mark Zuckerberg pregnant with space alien baby!" This seems like it's playing into the hands of political opponents who might accuse the campaign of being dishonest.
Facebook could just ban political advertising for a year. They don't stand to lose a lot of money, just political influence. It would be a smart move though that would shut the mouths of their rivals in the press.
I dont think you realize how much money is in political ads.
https://investor.fb.com/investor-news/press-release-details/...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-electi...
If the goal was just to make a point-- why not make some gonzo claim that virtually no one would believe and which wouldn't obviously benefit their campaign when anyone does believe it? Something along the lines of "Mark Zuckerberg pregnant with space alien baby!" This seems like it's playing into the hands of political opponents who might accuse the campaign of being dishonest.
I would argue that the ad, as it is, proves her point well. Political ads tend to make claims/conclusions that tend to be believable or within the realm of possibility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would argue that the ad, as it is, proves her point well. Political ads tend to make claims/conclusions that tend to be believable or within the realm of possibility.
Nobody believed it though, not even the_Donald. If that was the point it failed quite spectacularly. Hope her campaign tosses it as a silly idea and not make any more fuss around it.
It's become a standard refrain in political discussion that [media outlet, platform x] is behaving non-neutrally to help your opponents.
If trump ran a campaign saying that facebook was colluding with warren to manipulate outcomes many trump supporters would believe it-- perhaps it was facebook sucking up to prevent being split up-- and many warren supporters would disbelieve it.
If I heard that Mark Zuckerberg endorsed Trump's reelection from someone I trusted (rather than from a political ad), I would have absolutely believed it. ... but then again I don't particularly care for either facebook or trump.
At the end of the day the Warren campaign has effectively admitted that its willing to run overtly false adds targeting companies that they've previously taken issue with. They had a justification for doing so, but that justification may ring pretty hollow for people who are undecided in supporting the campaign.
Trump supporters often justify many of trumps' more obviously untruthful statements with excuses like you're not supposed to take his words literally. Unsurprisingly, many people are not convinced by this position.
They probably need Twitter, etc. for other demographics.