Facebook Extends Political Ad Ban In US For At Least a Month (theguardian.com) 51
Facebook's ban on political ads, which was initially projected to last just one week, is being extended for at least another month. The decision is aimed at limiting the misinformation that's spreading rampantly over its platform in the wake of the U.S. election. The Guardian reports: "We are keeping the ad pause and other temporary election protection measures in place as that result moves towards certification next month," said Rob Leathern, director of product management at Facebook. "We are keeping the ad pause and other temporary election protection measures in place as that result moves towards certification next month," said Rob Leathern, director of product management at Facebook. "We know that people are disappointed that we can't immediately enable ads for runoff elections in Georgia and elsewhere," Leathern added. "It's taken years to build the infrastructure that supports the Facebook Ad Library and ensure that political ads are transparent. We do not have the technical ability in the short term to enable political ads by state or by advertiser, and we are also committed to giving political advertisers equal access to our tools and services."
With political adverts banned across the US, neither Democrats nor Republicans can take advantage of Facebook in their campaigns in Georgia, where both Senate seats are up for grabs on 5 January in a pair of runoff elections. According to Facebook's own research, the ban is likely to hurt Democrats slightly more, as the company says advertising on its site provides, on average, a proportional advantage to challengers against incumbents. Google is also continuing its political advertising ban, though it hasn't given a definite end date to the suspension.
With political adverts banned across the US, neither Democrats nor Republicans can take advantage of Facebook in their campaigns in Georgia, where both Senate seats are up for grabs on 5 January in a pair of runoff elections. According to Facebook's own research, the ban is likely to hurt Democrats slightly more, as the company says advertising on its site provides, on average, a proportional advantage to challengers against incumbents. Google is also continuing its political advertising ban, though it hasn't given a definite end date to the suspension.
A month is a good start. (Score:3)
Now if only they would keep the political ad ban indefinitely.
Re: A month is a good start. (Score:3)
And religion. The bloodiest wars ever fought stem from politics and religion. The internet would be a nicer place if these platforms used the same rules we used for family gatherings. Religion spills into politics and politics spills into religion. That just leaves supremacy groups, which I think might just fall into one or the other category anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: A month is a good start. (Score:3)
Lol well theres an easy button for that one. ;-) just hit logout.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly.
Seriously, political and pharmaceutical ads should be banned completely and permanently, at the very least.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Religion is philosophy applied inwards.
Politics is philosophy applied outwards
Same coin, just different sides.
Banning those topics isn't going to solve anything. People WILL gravitate to talking about those things regardless of what you do. The problem is NOT the topics themselves but HOW some people are inconsiderate, rude, and disrespectful people are toward those of an opposite perspective.
By not allowing for a civil discussion in the first place then that is making the entire situation worse IMHO.
It is
Re: (Score:2)
If people aren't allowed to express themselves how will they potentially learn WHY it is a problem for some people? Ignoring the problem doesn't make it go away.
Horses for courses. In the case of Facebook political ads, at some point, it crosses the threshold of just annoying to being harassment. It is the same when you have to turn your phone off to get anything done. As a reluctant facebook user, The noise to signal ratio during the 2016 General election was horrid. And I had a lot less than some folks due to a few tricks.
Political animals are like the parents who let their children run amok in restaurants in that they have no problem annoying the hell out of p
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone still using Facebook will want to watch this excellent documentary on Netflix:
The Social Dilemma
https://www.netflix.com/title/... [netflix.com]
Re: A month is a good start. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd argue most wars are economic. Even the supposedly religious Crusades were really about Western princes getting their hands on the trade routes in Asia Minor.
Re: (Score:1)
Even the war in Syria has been about the natural gas pipeline the Western globalists want to build across Syria.
Speaking of which, now that the warmongers are back in power....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
pretty much all history can be traced to money and power. the the two are related.
And pretty much all religion is about both money and power.
Re: (Score:2)
Religion is just another form of tribalism. It serves as a moderator of social interactions, as well as marking insider from outsider As such, it functions as a powerful motivator. The Papacy couldn't just tell the Western kings and emperors that the desire to save the Eastern Empire was also about gaining spiritual (and hence temporal) power over Eastern bishops, and so they were sold on the idea of taking chunks of Byzantine territory and squatting on one of the most important trade routes on the planet.
Re: (Score:2)
Technically every war was started by politics. But religion? WWI WWII Vietnam Korea .... Which ones were started by religion? Even the gulf wars were about oil.
The ongoing wars in the middle east are 100% about religion, and the Evangelical Right wing that supports them are all about religion. 9-11 and the resulting forever war is all about religion. Iraq, yes. Afghanstan, definitely.
Thoughts?
Re: (Score:1)
Good (Score:3, Funny)
Re: Good (Score:2)
/. Really needs a good sarcasm font doesnt it?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm glad we have a non-partisan platform policing speech around our elections.
The scary thing these days is that there's absolutely no way to know if you are joking.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Good (Score:5, Funny)
I'm glad we have a non-partisan platform policing speech around our elections.
Like how Parler is kicking people off [techdirt.com] because they're rubbing Biden's win in the faces of con artist supporters.
Because, you know, it's such a free speech place.
Re: (Score:1)
Rubbing anything in somebody's face sounds a lot like blatant trolling.
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
Rubbing anything in somebody's face sounds a lot like blatant trolling.
Ah I see, Parler is still a bastion of free speech because those people were free speeching wrong so it doesn't count as censorship.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm glad we have a non-partisan platform policing speech around our elections.
Eh? Whatever makes you think Facebook is aligned with a political party? Zuck is about maximising profit and nothing else.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
what behavior have you seems that indicates something other than Zuck chasing dollars to the exclusion of all else? He doesn't care about you or left wingers or LGBT rights or religion or any of that shit. He's a money grubbing sociopath. If he bans something it's because he thinks not banning it will reduce profit.
If Zuck is political or means he cares about something other than himself and his wallet. Frankly I don't buy it.
Don't worry (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Don't worry (Score:2)
Ironically Im ok with a total ban. Thats saying a lot considering how distrustful I am of overreach. What I dont like is an unmeasured and selective process of blocking. That is subjective. A flat out binary approach means that the restrictions would be unilaterally applied regardless of source, content, or well-meaning.
Facebook banned (Score:4, Interesting)
Facebook and all its benighted progeny are banned in my house. This ban to continue for another month. Then another month after that. Then every month after that.
But you are still talking about Facebook (Score:1)
so not a total ban, just a symbolic ban
Re: (Score:2)
And they play dirty. Constantly trying to change the rules, slandering anyone who speaks against them, and enforcing their rule with an iron fist.
One party is committed to constraining the power of government - reducing authority and keeping it within strict boundaries. The other party is committed to expanding government authority and silencing opposition to it's use of that authority. The same
My Heroes. (Score:2)
You Have No Idea What is Happening Right Now (Score:1)
What Facebook really wants people to miss (Score:3)
Facebook was not just a host for political ads - they've been a SOURCE [fastcompany.com] of some of the spending. That's not just as a company, but also their employees [govpredict.com]. That's also before you get into the money the company poured [washingtonpost.com] directly into the mechanisms of voting and vote counting.
Remind me again: How many foreign citizens work at Facebook? (rhetorical question - they don't like publicizing this either)
With the upcoming senate runoff votes, Facebook and the other big tech firms will probably try to double-down on the c
Zero effect (Score:2)
Doesnâ(TM)t do anything. They just run ads for the right wing sites/shows that promote the candidates instead.
It's not the ads that are the problem... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
FaceBook is Pinterest (Score:2)
As far as I'm concerned. Just another fouled link that I'll hit back on if a search result returns it. There's nothing I have that depends on it.
Of course the world doesn't work that way. We're not their target demographic. Maybe FB provides a valuable service by sequestering the Eternal September away from us.
Convenient for claims election fraud doesn't exist (Score:3)
How convenient that "political advertising" is banned on these platforms - from the end of the election until the count is final and the Electoral College process is over (first Monday after second Wednesday in December).
That's exactly when any evidence supporting claims of election fraud would surface and propagating it might be useful. So it's the perfect time to muzzle anyone making such claims and trying to present such evidence.
For elections to do their job of keeping the peace, they must appear honest - to the losing side. Muzzling the losing side's speech is the perfect way to convince them that the elections were dishonest.
Awfully convenient definition of misinformation. (Score:2)