Twitter Will Show Who Pays For Ads and How Much They Spend (bloomberg.com) 111
Twitter will show detailed information about advertisers in an attempt to combat meddling in future elections. You will now be able to search for a Twitter account and see all the ads it has run in the past seven days. "For U.S. political advertisers, users will be able to see billing information, ad spending, demographic targeting data and the number of times tweets have been viewed," reports Bloomberg. From the report: The changes are part of Twitter's broader efforts to clean up its service after lawmakers berated the company for failing to discover Russian influence peddling through fake accounts and divisive ads during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Earlier this week, the company began requiring more authentication from users. In May, it rolled out stricter rules that require advertisers running political campaign ads for federal elections to identify themselves and certify they are located in the U.S. The company has also banned ads from accounts owned by Russia Today and Sputnik.
Thanks Trump (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It got attention because of Russia meddling in US politics. Don't be obtuse.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No one would have cared that Russia meddled if the "right person" had gotten elected. To date, no one STILL cares about the meddling that Clinton did
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Had she won there would have been no fuss about any Russian interference. Obama had actionable intelligence 8 months before the election and did not say or do anything. His stated reason for taking no action on the intelligence was he did not want to disrupt the on-going campaigns. Of course he and all the political experts fully expected Clinton to win the election. If she won there would be no need to bring up any Russian interference. All the social media companies would have never changed any of their o
Thanks Trump (Score:5, Interesting)
It got attention because of Russia meddling in US politics. Don't be obtuse.
It got attention because Hillary lost, and there had to be *some* reason for it that didn't put the blame on Hillary or the Democrats.
Along with sexism, misogyny, Bernie Sanders, Wikileaks, low information voters, women under pressure from men, and James Comey.
Hillary's comment is informative:
"I never imagined that [Putin] would have the audacity to launch a massive covert attack against our own democracy, right under our noses - and that he'd get away with it."
The Russian interference amounted to about $1.25 million per month [fivethirtyeight.com], compared to the $1.2 billion spent by Hillary, or $617 the million spent by Trump.
But it's probably good to be able to tell who's purchasing ads in future elections.
Re: (Score:3)
The correct solution is to reduce the power of government, and, by doing so, reducing its control as a prize.
Increasing power, including censorship of the printing press to mass produce and distribute speech, is rocketting in the wrong direction.
Actually, you did (Score:1)
Actually I didn't lose. Trump is going to prison for the rest of his life and Republican faggot cowards like yourself will have to just deal with it ongoing forever, bitch. Don't cry snowflake, Donald doesn't care if you live or die lol. Moron.
Actually, you did.
There's a movement afoot (check the hashtag #WalkAway) of people fleeing the Democratic party. It began with this video [youtube.com].
Watched and reposted by hundreds of thousands of people, it has sparked a wave of dissent and abandonment of the Democratic ideals in this country. People fed up with suppression of free speech, insults, false reporting, and general hatred from the left.
The movement is reportedly huge [youtube.com], with over a billion related views and reposts on the subject, and an estimated several
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you voted for Hillary, she committed the greatest of all crimes during an election, rigging one. The whole thing, from Email servers, to DNC hacked Emails, to tarmac meetings, to Deep State spying was all exposing her for the crimes she and others on her direct behalf were committing (and some are continuing to this day).
The ONLY thing so far to come out of the Trump/Russia Collusion story is ... Hillary paid for FSB sponsored dirt on Trump, the Deep State used that to spy on his campaign, and have lied
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're not paranoid, you're not paying attention.
Just because one is paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get us.
And yet, the Political Left is based on the greatest boogie men conspiracies, and yet nobody calls it that "Because it is real" (Racism, Sexism, Homophobia etc etc etc). FYI, I don't deny these things exist, I deny their power at the Federal, State, and the "System" levels.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually I didn't lose. Trump is going to prison for the rest of his life and Republican faggot cowards like yourself will have to just deal with it ongoing forever, bitch. Don't cry snowflake, Donald doesn't care if you live or die lol. Moron.
Ha, even if you are right about Trump going to prison you still lose. They aren't going to remove his Supreme Court nominations, which is arguably the most important thing a president does (arguably by a very large margin). A Republican will still be in office even if Trump is sent to prison. A Republican will still be in office even if Pence is impeached along with Trump.
A significant amount of the damage cannot be undone. The effects of the 2016 election will be felt in the most impactful legal decisions
Re: (Score:2)
That's a cute way of comparing totals to monthly amount to disguise the total amount. But your numbers suggest (once per month is totaled) that ~2% of Trump's spending by Russia.
Also, while money is money, the ability to spend money in certain areas is limited by US entities. That's not even counting that people saluting a flag are often underpaid.
All tha
Re: (Score:2)
Stop trying to polarize the debate and take a calm, rational look at it. There is hard evidence of Russian interference in US democracy. There is also a solid argument to be made that Clinton was not a good candidate. Both those things can be true and have a significant impact.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop trying to polarize the debate and take a calm, rational look at it. There is hard evidence of Russian interference in US democracy. There is also a solid argument to be made that Clinton was not a good candidate. Both those things can be true and have a significant impact.
But life is so much easier if you can just say Trump=Good, Clinton=Bad. (Or vice versa).
Re: (Score:1)
Can someone please tell me what form that "Russian meddling" took? All I've seen is that they've advertised. Which is what the candidates and various pressure groups and special interest groups also did.
Is advertising magical? Does advertising somehow exert mind-control on voters? When done by Russians, I mean.
Not when done by agribusinesses or political parties or the AFL-CIO or the U.S. Army or any of the many siblings of the Military-Industrial Complex. That advertising is completely non-magical.
Re: (Score:2)
Is advertising magical? Does advertising somehow exert mind-control on voters?
Facebook said the same thing at first, then they looked at how it changed how people posted. Psychological profiles were built on people and then applied the correct pressure.
American voters can't be fooled into voting badly.
They absolutely can and are regularly. The entire republican platform is built on that concept.
Re: (Score:1)
They absolutely can and are regularly. The entire republican platform is built on that concept.
Advertising works, well enough. Well enough to pay for it, at least sometimes, for some advertisers. Is anyone surprised?
As for political parties fooling people, it's not like the Republicans (FTFY) have a lock on it. Have you heard of the Democrats?
Re: (Score:2)
your either ignorant of the type of "advertising" they were doing or you are being disingenuous about it. either way, stfu and fuck off. ;)
Re: (Score:1)
your either ignorant of the type of "advertising" they were doing or you are being disingenuous about it. either way, stfu and fuck off. ;)
Thank you for the advice, but no thanks. (Also, brief pretend paranoiac interlude: George Soros didn't get his money's worth from you today. Or were the spelling and punctuation errors deliberate, as part of your on-line persona?)
The kind of weird-ass stuff TDS suffers would post for free? Yeah. I'm aware. (The TDS-R strain of Trump Derangement Syndrome.) At least, I think it was sincere. I meet equally deranged people IRL, so it's certainly possible.
So, what's your point?
I don't expect beer or pi
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The ruddy-blooming ruskies gots a right to peddle putin will up on your americanski's arses just as much as republicans have da right to keep your pending baby. Let thar be lite! For those about to rock! Fire! We salute jou!
- Zoya the Destroya, GLOW
*Paid (Score:2)
Cool. Now show who has already PAID for ads.
Re: (Score:2)
Cool. Now show who has already PAID for ads.
It would not do you much good. Up until now even foreigners could buy campaign ads in the US with impunity. People who have tried to trace money flowing into PACs have basically hit a wall of shell companies and obscure financial service companies with unclear ownership. Now Google, Facebook, Twitter et-al are checking only that ads are paid for by a US entity. I'm willing to bet that all that will change is that from now on the last entity the money is routed through before it ends up in Google, Facebook a
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Memes next? (Score:3)
Information like this (Score:3)
Something called "the Committee for Government Healthiness" spent money. Thanks Twitter. We still don't know anything about this group or whether they go by 100 other names.
Re: (Score:2)
(Clicks little ? on ad) "This ad paid for by Americans for Free Elections America Great Comrades, Tampa, FL"
Re: (Score:2)
That's way too much work. Just nuke the ads from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
Re: (Score:2)
A good meme will not got blocked as it is part of the site and user content.
The SJW idea of censoring political ads is not going to work.
The content will become political.
Will the SJW then expect a site to politically approve artistic content for its powers of US political persuasion?
Any meme with too much amphibian related political messages can be reported to SJW?
No political donkey ca
If that headline is entirely correct (Score:2)
Then I'd be sorely tempted to short $TWTR. Advertisers do not like customers knowing their being advertised to, at all.
That's not how advertising (generally) works.
One disposable account per ad (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Create a bunch of fake accounts. Each one is a shell for one and only one ad.
Well, some of those names Twitter has provided from the Yoyodyne Corporation look strangely familiar:
Vlad Barnett
Vlad Bigboote
Vlad Camp
Vlad Careful Walker
Vlad Chief Crier
Vlad Cooper
Vlad Coyote
Vlad Edwards
Vlad Fat Eating
Vlad Fish
Vlad Fledgling
Vlad Gomez
Vlad Grim
Vlad Guardian
Vlad Icicle Boy
Vlad Jones
Vlad Joseph
Vlad Kim Chi
Vlad Lee
Vlad LittleVlad
Vlad Many Jars
Vlad Milton
Vlad Mud Head
Vlad Nephew
Vlad Nolan
Vlad O'Connor
Vlad Omar
Vlad Parrot
Vlad Rajeesh
Vlad Ready to Fly
Vlad Repeat Dan