6 ms·
Facebook to publish data on Irish abortion referendum ads
- iandioch 8y agoThis is great news. However, I saw the most ads on Youtube; it would be great if Google followed suit and released similar data. I hope this sets a precedent for publishing ad spending in future referenda too.
- mattmanser 8y agoIt says in the article: Under pressure from Irish politicians and activists, including the non-partisan Transparent Referendum Institute, Google banned all referendum-linked advertising on its sites. Did this only happen part way through? Or were people still advertising, Google just claimed they weren't?
- Rjevski 8y agoPresumably they went under the radar.
- ploika 8y agoIt happened about a week or two out from the vote, in a campaign that had been officially been running for a couple of months (I can't remember how long exactly), and had seen low-key unofficial campaigning for easily a couple of years at that point.
- rusk 8y agoI think really there's been a lot of campaigning going on since it was first enacted back in 1983. Even the Attorney General warned of unintended consequences. The supporters of the 8th are highly organised, and motivated (as anyone would be if in their head they actually equated any and all abortion to killing of actual babies), and any revisitation had been continuously thwarted. However, it's really in the last 5 years since the Death of Savita Halappanavar [0] that the issue took hold in the public consciousness, and campaigning really began in earnest. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar
- kanox 8y agoUsing the banner of "transparency" to stifle political advertising is just censorship through other means. We should instead explicitly allow and protect unlimited anonymous political messaging.
- Milner08 8y agoThat just gives the party with the money the upper hand. Thats an awful idea.
- yostrovs 8y agoMoney in politics actually does little for the candidates. Please review Freakanomics on this. As a recent example, Trump won with a great deal less money than what Hillary used. Had he used more, we would not hear the end of how money influences politics. But it doesn't. People have tastes, convictions, prejudices, etc that no amount of ads will change. Ads affect a small number of people and help to cement in the voting block, improve turnout, etc. Swaying votes is much harder. The media is in charge of that.
- ameister14 8y agoMoney in politics past a certain amount does little for the candidates. The difference between 600k and 100k is significant, politically.
- ameister14 8y agoHow does it change which party has more money? They can already advertise, it'll just be tracked with their name - how does that change with anonymity? Wouldn't it instead make you actually look at the content instead of knee-jerk this party good, that party bad?
- fabricexpert 8y agoWhy? Surely that means that the winners of every referendum or election will be those with the deepest pockets?
- JeanMarcS 8y agoDespite the fact that transparency is a good thing, what will happen now ? Every time someone loose an election the will blame Facebook (or Google or anyone) ? I understand that when the result are tight it’s important to be fully transparent, but the election looser always have an excuse (It’s FB, it was too sunny so people went picnic, etc...) I’m speaking generally, not on this specific election. Just wondering what future elections result will be
- Gwafa_Hazid 8y agoThere's a quote in the article from the leader of the Irish green party, Eamon Ryan, that to me underlines why this is important, "We want transparency about online political advertising so hidden funding does not distort the democratic process." It's that hidden funding that scares me. Whether it's massive spending by mega-corporations or targeted ads by foreign intelligence agencies. We can't understand how our democracy is being affected unless we know who is behind the money.
- yellowcherry 8y agoI'd take this concern seriously if we weren't 50 years or more into carefully chosen and promoted intentionally divisive issues shaping what everyone thinks of politics.
- duxup 8y agoWhat does that mean?
- Retric 8y agoAbortion is exactly the kind of issue that has zero impact on those in power, who can always go to another country, but influences elections. In terms of shaping views, welfare was designed to allow single mothers to stay home and raise their kids. Yet by twisting the issue people no longer support the idea. Unions are no longer seen as something that helps 'you', they now help 'other' people.
- Shivetya 8y agoas long as it remains anonymized I see no problem with revealing the money. it is when it becomes public who donated that issues arise. at most I could see revealing country of origin
- ihsw2 8y agoThe progressive supremacist agenda marches on. No doubt that spending by their compatriots will be quietly swept under the rug, whereas opponents of those cadres' agendas will be shone under a bright light and labelled "dark."
- duxup 8y agoWhat are you saying? Facebook will lie about some ads but not others?
- sctb 8y agoWe've asked you several times before to stop using this site for political or ideological battle. That's not what it's for! Such battle is repetitive and boring—a monotonous whacking over the head with the same arguments. So, we've banned the account. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- dfxm12 8y agoI wonder if this is going to be a one-off, or if perhaps this is a test for larger elections/referendums to come.