4 ms·

Even if they knew, I'm still not totally clear on what's wrong with running those ads. It seems everyone has such a low opinion of everyone else these days. I r

Even if they knew, I'm still not totally clear on what's wrong with running those ads. It seems everyone has such a low opinion of everyone else these days. I really wish the outcome of learning that Russians bought ads on facebook was a cultural antibody to not believe ads, not a call to ever more closely regulate what stuff people should see.

bm1362 9y ago
One could make the meta-argument that this is an attack on our trust in Facebook, a news conduit, and that the end result is people are more reliant on traditional news monopolies.
walshemj 9y ago
Avoiding the regulations on election spending and for those country's that have them the strict rules on political advertising eg in the UK all political adverts must have a named promoter who is registered
danenania 9y ago
While I agree that we don't want legally mandated censorship, companies like Facebook are constantly making decisions about what sorts of ads and content to allow or disallow on their platforms. I don't think it's too much to ask that they extend these policies to material that is designed by spy agencies to function as divisive and destabilizing propaganda. This kind of stuff can even lead directly to physical violence in extreme cases (think Pizzagate), so there is clearly some sort of line that these companies need to enforce if they want to be viewed as responsible actors. If they're smart, they'll self-police before it becomes a question of legal remedies.
- vasilipupkin 9y ago
  Sure, but to somehow blame them for the stupidity of people that can be swayed by a ridiculous facebook ad is itself ridiculous. Facebook ads is not why Clinton lost to Trump and continuing to pretend like it is is just dumb.
  - danenania 9y ago
    We aren't just talking about some random FB ads. These were targeted specifically at undecided voters in swing states based on data from hacked voter rolls. It was a surgical operation designed to shift the balance while leaving a small footprint. It obviously wasn't the only factor, but given the extremely thin margins in the pivotal states, it's not unreasonable to wonder whether it could have been the straw that broke the camel's back. Whether or not it was the case, there should not be any question whether the elections of the world's supposed shining example of democracy might have been decided based on a foreign mafia state's disinformation campaign. Any companies that may have been unwitting accomplices need to own up and begin working on defensive measures immediately.
    - vasilipupkin 9y ago
      you are talking about this as if somebody got into the brain of those undecided voters and surgically forced them to vote one way or the other. It was their decision, made of free will and if a nonsensical ad can sway them, the responsibility is theirs ! at some point human beings have to take responsibility for their own decisions instead of blaming everyone else.
      - TeMPOraL 9y ago
        Actually, I disagree with your argument and agree with the conclusion. The way I see it, ads work, but I feel the Russian angle is mostly overblown bullshit, and US with its history of fucking up elections worldwide should be the last to point fingers. That said, I'd love for people to be consistent. If one believes that Russian targeted ads were so influencial that they swayed the election, they should just admit that ads are that powerful, and follow it to the natural conclusion - that the advertisement industry is evil and malicious, a disrespectable profession that's an affront to a free society. It's just people taking advantage of other people. So let's talk about that, and not about Russians.
    - spaced-out 9y ago
      On top of that, we're not just talking about pro-Trump, anti-Clinton ads. Some of the Russian ads were clearly designed to incite racism[1,2]. There was an anti-Islam rally in Houston[3], organized by a Facebook group called "Heart of Texas", which was later revealed to be a fake account operating out of Russia. This isn't just an abstract game of geopolitics, they're literally trying to incite racial violence. 1: http://thehill.com/policy/technology/353480-report-russian-bought-facebook-ad-showed-a-black-woman-dry-firing-a-rifle http://thehill.com/policy/technology/353480-report-russian-b... 2: https://www.recode.net/2017/10/7/16439936/congressional-black-caucus-lawmakers-facebook-twitter-racism-black-lives-matter-russia-2016-election https://www.recode.net/2017/10/7/16439936/congressional-blac... 3: https://thinkprogress.org/armed-white-supremacist-protest-organized-by-russians-d730f83ca275/ https://thinkprogress.org/armed-white-supremacist-protest-or...
- stevenwoo 9y ago
  Political ads are regulated in the USA on broadcast/print networks (one has to state who paid for it) so either one would want them to be unregulated or the ads on Facebook probably should be regulated to be equal in treatment. There's also the foreign funding aspect that is also regulated in the USA. This is independent from the actual source being a spy agency issue. The pizzagate originator was a white nationalist/red pill troll in the USA. The way Twitter selectively enforces its TOS arguably makes it easy for these folks to do their work. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/us/politics/mike-cernovich-bio-who.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/us/politics/mike-cernovic...
dredmorbius 9y ago
It's illegal. https://www.fec.gov/updates/foreign-nationals/ https://www.fec.gov/updates/foreign-nationals/

bm1362 9y ago

One could make the meta-argument that this is an attack on our trust in Facebook, a news conduit, and that the end result is people are more reliant on traditional news monopolies.

walshemj 9y ago

Avoiding the regulations on election spending and for those country's that have them the strict rules on political advertising eg in the UK all political adverts must have a named promoter who is registered

danenania 9y ago

While I agree that we don't want legally mandated censorship, companies like Facebook are constantly making decisions about what sorts of ads and content to allow or disallow on their platforms. I don't think it's too much to ask that they extend these policies to material that is designed by spy agencies to function as divisive and destabilizing propaganda. This kind of stuff can even lead directly to physical violence in extreme cases (think Pizzagate), so there is clearly some sort of line that these companies need to enforce if they want to be viewed as responsible actors. If they're smart, they'll self-police before it becomes a question of legal remedies.

vasilipupkin 9y ago
Sure, but to somehow blame them for the stupidity of people that can be swayed by a ridiculous facebook ad is itself ridiculous. Facebook ads is not why Clinton lost to Trump and continuing to pretend like it is is just dumb.
- danenania 9y ago
  We aren't just talking about some random FB ads. These were targeted specifically at undecided voters in swing states based on data from hacked voter rolls. It was a surgical operation designed to shift the balance while leaving a small footprint. It obviously wasn't the only factor, but given the extremely thin margins in the pivotal states, it's not unreasonable to wonder whether it could have been the straw that broke the camel's back. Whether or not it was the case, there should not be any question whether the elections of the world's supposed shining example of democracy might have been decided based on a foreign mafia state's disinformation campaign. Any companies that may have been unwitting accomplices need to own up and begin working on defensive measures immediately.
  - vasilipupkin 9y ago
    you are talking about this as if somebody got into the brain of those undecided voters and surgically forced them to vote one way or the other. It was their decision, made of free will and if a nonsensical ad can sway them, the responsibility is theirs ! at some point human beings have to take responsibility for their own decisions instead of blaming everyone else.
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      Actually, I disagree with your argument and agree with the conclusion. The way I see it, ads work, but I feel the Russian angle is mostly overblown bullshit, and US with its history of fucking up elections worldwide should be the last to point fingers. That said, I'd love for people to be consistent. If one believes that Russian targeted ads were so influencial that they swayed the election, they should just admit that ads are that powerful, and follow it to the natural conclusion - that the advertisement industry is evil and malicious, a disrespectable profession that's an affront to a free society. It's just people taking advantage of other people. So let's talk about that, and not about Russians.
  - spaced-out 9y ago
    On top of that, we're not just talking about pro-Trump, anti-Clinton ads. Some of the Russian ads were clearly designed to incite racism[1,2]. There was an anti-Islam rally in Houston[3], organized by a Facebook group called "Heart of Texas", which was later revealed to be a fake account operating out of Russia. This isn't just an abstract game of geopolitics, they're literally trying to incite racial violence. 1: http://thehill.com/policy/technology/353480-report-russian-bought-facebook-ad-showed-a-black-woman-dry-firing-a-rifle http://thehill.com/policy/technology/353480-report-russian-b... 2: https://www.recode.net/2017/10/7/16439936/congressional-black-caucus-lawmakers-facebook-twitter-racism-black-lives-matter-russia-2016-election https://www.recode.net/2017/10/7/16439936/congressional-blac... 3: https://thinkprogress.org/armed-white-supremacist-protest-organized-by-russians-d730f83ca275/ https://thinkprogress.org/armed-white-supremacist-protest-or...
stevenwoo 9y ago
Political ads are regulated in the USA on broadcast/print networks (one has to state who paid for it) so either one would want them to be unregulated or the ads on Facebook probably should be regulated to be equal in treatment. There's also the foreign funding aspect that is also regulated in the USA. This is independent from the actual source being a spy agency issue. The pizzagate originator was a white nationalist/red pill troll in the USA. The way Twitter selectively enforces its TOS arguably makes it easy for these folks to do their work. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/us/politics/mike-cernovich-bio-who.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/us/politics/mike-cernovic...

dredmorbius 9y ago

It's illegal. https://www.fec.gov/updates/foreign-nationals/ https://www.fec.gov/updates/foreign-nationals/