6 ms·

Despite 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) ?

Despite 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 ago
There'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 ago
  I'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 ago
    What does that mean?
    - Retric 8y ago
      Abortion 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.
      - duxup 8y ago
        Are you saying they don't actually care about the issue?
        Retric 8y ago
        Clearly some people care about the issue and many say they care about it. But in terms of overall importance the tax bill for example got vastly more support. So, I suspect actual support is rather low. In other words people might vote yes, yet at the same time prefer it not come up for a vote.
        duxup 8y ago
        I'm not sure I get where you are going. It might be a divisive issue but saying that simply because it comes up and you think something else is more important doesn't mean it is being used just to be divisive.
        yellowcherry 8y ago
        It doesn't "simply come up" Tens of millions of dollars keep it in the forefront of your brain. There is no accident here. There is no "simply comes up"
        duxup 8y ago
        So the amount of money spent means people don't really care or it's an illegitimate topic or something? I'm suspicious of some topics and the support they get myself, but your approach here seems much too fast to dismiss a topic that maybe you don't like. It's way too easy to just say something is not organic or illegitimate when the issue is unpleasant rather than really deal with it. I don't know if anyone has a good way of getting their finger on legitimate, or topics that are more "important" than others in a democracy.
        yellowcherry 8y ago
michaelt 8y ago
what will happen now? Presumably the first use of data will be to figure out whether the problems people worry about really exist. For example, maybe we're worried foreign governments / billionaires are using facebook ads to influence our elections. Maybe the data will be good news, proving that this hasn't happened. And if the evidence shows it has happened, we'll be in a more informed position to discuss fixing it.
untog 8y ago
As you said, the losers will always have an excuse for why they lost if they want one. This doesn't really do anything to impact that. But targeted online advertising is a brand new thing in the political world. Data like this will be essential for academics to study the effect of this kind of advertising on an election.
rusk 8y ago
> I’m speaking generally, not on this specific election. Well, with regards to this specific "referendum", there was a landslide in favour of repeal (of the 8th Ammendment to the constitution, which blanket banned any and all abortion under all circumstances). All polling and subsequent analysis suggest that there was nothing untoward with this result. However. This was a hugely divisive topic, as you might expect, and it attracted a huge amount of attention from oversees. Complaints have been made on both sides of the campaign about interference by foreign actors, in particular well-funded ones buying and targeting ads. That Facebook gave an undertaking to stop running ads, came to naught since they continued to run the ads because who can say no to that kind of money right? What Irish people want to know is "who" and to what degree outside forces were trying to interfere with the democratic process here. How much money was being spent, and, to understand definitively which side was doing more meddling, because there's been a fair amount of mudslinging the last six months or so.
garg 8y ago
Increased transparency and access to data about the process will also keep people from blaming the platform.

Gwafa_Hazid 8y ago

There'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 ago
I'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 ago
  What does that mean?
  - Retric 8y ago
    Abortion 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.
    - duxup 8y ago
      Are you saying they don't actually care about the issue?
      - Retric 8y ago
        Clearly some people care about the issue and many say they care about it. But in terms of overall importance the tax bill for example got vastly more support. So, I suspect actual support is rather low. In other words people might vote yes, yet at the same time prefer it not come up for a vote.
        duxup 8y ago
        I'm not sure I get where you are going. It might be a divisive issue but saying that simply because it comes up and you think something else is more important doesn't mean it is being used just to be divisive.
        yellowcherry 8y ago
        It doesn't "simply come up" Tens of millions of dollars keep it in the forefront of your brain. There is no accident here. There is no "simply comes up"
        duxup 8y ago
        So the amount of money spent means people don't really care or it's an illegitimate topic or something? I'm suspicious of some topics and the support they get myself, but your approach here seems much too fast to dismiss a topic that maybe you don't like. It's way too easy to just say something is not organic or illegitimate when the issue is unpleasant rather than really deal with it. I don't know if anyone has a good way of getting their finger on legitimate, or topics that are more "important" than others in a democracy.
        yellowcherry 8y ago

michaelt 8y ago

what will happen now? Presumably the first use of data will be to figure out whether the problems people worry about really exist. For example, maybe we're worried foreign governments / billionaires are using facebook ads to influence our elections. Maybe the data will be good news, proving that this hasn't happened. And if the evidence shows it has happened, we'll be in a more informed position to discuss fixing it.

untog 8y ago

As you said, the losers will always have an excuse for why they lost if they want one. This doesn't really do anything to impact that. But targeted online advertising is a brand new thing in the political world. Data like this will be essential for academics to study the effect of this kind of advertising on an election.

rusk 8y ago

> I’m speaking generally, not on this specific election. Well, with regards to this specific "referendum", there was a landslide in favour of repeal (of the 8th Ammendment to the constitution, which blanket banned any and all abortion under all circumstances). All polling and subsequent analysis suggest that there was nothing untoward with this result. However. This was a hugely divisive topic, as you might expect, and it attracted a huge amount of attention from oversees. Complaints have been made on both sides of the campaign about interference by foreign actors, in particular well-funded ones buying and targeting ads. That Facebook gave an undertaking to stop running ads, came to naught since they continued to run the ads because who can say no to that kind of money right? What Irish people want to know is "who" and to what degree outside forces were trying to interfere with the democratic process here. How much money was being spent, and, to understand definitively which side was doing more meddling, because there's been a fair amount of mudslinging the last six months or so.

garg 8y ago

Increased transparency and access to data about the process will also keep people from blaming the platform.