Some folks like @rrhoover have made the point that stopping political advertising could cause folks to influence voters in other, more subtle ways. I'm inclined to agree.
I think of how influencers blur the boundaries of advertising and think political ads will be able to do the same. That said - I still think it's a good idea, at least to try and see if it can reduce the spread of false information.
What are your thoughts?
@rrhoover@abadesi IMO it's helpful. Some parties have much larger budgets than others, and although this money will still be spent in other places, this move at least helps to level one of the playing fields.
If social platforms also find it too difficult to accurately check all ads for facts, this can help curb the spread of misinformation.
@rrhoover@abadesi Political ads lead to political decisions that affect the world (ie US Pres. Race). Social media's power to influence and spread information shouldn't be taken lightly especially when it comes to the spreading of political ideas.
I feel that this decision makes it so candidates have to actually put in work and "earn" that influence instead of throwing money into a machine that pumps out engagement.
Influencer marketing is sure to receive an influx of political dollars. But Twitter has started the conversation, on a world scale, of a how unethical it is for political influence to be "Pay to play". I applaud jack
@rrhoover@antdke yes I'm glad he's used his influence to show platforms can put their foot down (instead of hiding behind "free speech")
Report
it only proofs the point that the political fb ads are business critical for them ánd the fb audience is way more influenceable
Report
@ssstofff I'd be willing to wager all of the political ad spending on Facebook combined totals less than one percent of their total ad business. What they're afraid of losing is influence, not money.
Report
@danyowell true, but important enough to turn that influence (one day) into money, their core business.
@ssstofff Facebook's stance certainly isn't about money. As @danyowell mentions, political ads is a tiny % of their ad spend.
The problem both Facebook and Twitter are attempting to address is very complex and unsolvable without a complete structuring of the system and perhaps society.
Report
@danyowell@rrhoover what would a society structuring looks like? (no sarcastic question)
Report
@rrhoover I don't completely agree with you, at least when it comes to political ads. I think this is very much down to the individual, about how easily you swallow the rubbish that is presented to you. So I think it's a matter of education and laziness of the individual rather than a society problem. There's a very easy solution that is almost impossible to put in place: make people think by themselves for themselves. That, to me, is different from an unsolvable problem.
Report
I'm a EU citizen living in the UK. Brexit is a mix of this and Cambridge Analytica, so I think it's a great idea. Making people go the extra mile to reach information will hopefully make them think a bit more instead of being force-fed with it.
Report
In theory it's a good idea, but I'm worried about how they plan to put the plan into motion, who they will target with this ban, how they are defining "political", how they will go about policing and enforcing the ban, and just whether they've truly thought through all of the potential ramifications.
If it helps to reduce misinformation, it will be a great move/idea.
Report
Business-wise it's foolish because they're not maximizing their revenue. If they're incapable of regulating who advertises what, then they don't have any control of their business. Their core values and ideology that guides their operations aren't rigid at all.
That aside, it's a hollow gesture anyway, because the advertisements are a small fraction of the political content that's generated on Twitter, which is by far more influential and vexing.
Report
@brendanciccone Well, negatively or positively, depending on your viewpoint. But Influencer marketing is very common. A lot of people with sizeable followers are willing to post their political stances and often try to sway others all the time. Celebrities and athletes especially.
I'm all for this, the influence that political ads had on the result of Brexit and the US election on Facebook is obvious to me and no party should be able to target people with their propaganda via advertising.
I'm happy that Twitter have taken this stance, but IMO Facebook is the main problem.
Report
Big brother tech social engineering at its worst. Wasn't Twitter supposed to democratize information? Now we will still have political marketing, but it will just be less authentic. The law of unintended consequences, will make political misinformation worse while also limiting messaging reach. Let all the people hear everything and let them be accountable for their decisions.
It's a great start, and we need to remember that adverts have been manipulating the public for centuries. Twitter and other platform will need to remain vigilant because as quickly as they shut down a method, there are people and orgs working just as hard for workarounds to achieve the results they want.
Replies
Hustle Crew Academy
Product Hunt
Airpanel
Hustle Crew Academy
Product Hunt
Hustle Crew Academy
Hustle Crew Academy
Product Hunt
Hustle Crew Academy
Hustle Crew Academy