4 ms·

Facebook could provide a quota of free advertising to political parties, and not allow them to buy any more outside their quota. This would be akin to governme

Facebook could provide a quota of free advertising to political parties, and not allow them to buy any more outside their quota. This would be akin to government provided airtime (“Party Political Broadcasts”) as done in Canada, UK and Ireland. I’ve always felt nervous about the role of money in politics and removing the requirement for massive ad-spend budgets might bring us closer to a more moral democracy, and away from pay-to-play.

WhompingWindows 7y ago
What about all the "independent" "non-affiliated" groups who are absolutely tied to a political party? How do you adjudicate those edge cases? It's the edge cases, IMO, that are the real bear here.
- gorgoiler 7y ago
  If they are absolutely tied to a political party, then they would count towards the quota. If they claim not to have a link then it becomes Facebook’s job to determine if there is one, which seems a lot more tractable than determining if a fact is true or false. Easy at least when the message is “don’t vote for Bob!”, than when it is “we don’t see any harm in GMO wheat”. Unattributed attack ads are pretty obvious but it’s harder to tie issue ads to the party they benefit.
tathougies 7y ago
No thanks. As a member of a small party that seems like it would just make us unable to meet the ridiculous requirements to qualify. As it is right now we can just pay for ads instead of having to meet arbitrary criteria. Thats a much fairer state of things
- gorgoiler 7y ago
  When you register to appear as an option on a ballot paper, wouldn’t that be sufficient to qualify for your quota of airtime for which you do not have to spend campaign funds?
  - tathougies 7y ago
    Sure, but that's not the only kind of political ads. If I believed being vegan were important, and had the money to run an ad in a paper, those are our rights as an American citizen and the newspaper's right as a group of Americans (it is a basic right to agree on a price for something, and then for the newspaper to publish it).
    - gorgoiler 7y ago
      Are you saying that the situation in the US is specifically muddied because politics now incorporates a fight about all aspects of ones life — the Culture Wars? That is to say, old fashioned political messages are no longer common; not much of “vote for Joe to cut property taxes for nurses!” or “don’t vote for Tammy, she will end free downtown parking” any more. Instead, there is more oblique messaging like some pastor saying “vaping is a sin!” as a passive aggressive attack on a candidate for office who made their fortune building a vaping business? This sort of thing feels like a consequence of the over extension of democracy into all parts of life. When you have direct democracy to elect judges and school superintendents, politics becomes everything to the extent that anything said publicly on any topic becomes political speech. That would indeed make it difficult to regulate uncontrolled political ad spamming. Brexit drove politics into everyday life in the UK as well, and it is all consuming. At least one thing I miss about the old days was that politics was about administration of the country.
      - tathougies 7y ago
        > Are you saying that the situation in the US is specifically muddied because politics now incorporates a fight about all aspects of ones life — the Culture Wars? No. Not quite. In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite. The argument is that people are concerned often about issues, not just candidates. This is a historical norm. It is as important (if not more) to allow platforms where everyone can publish and advertise their policy opinions, rather than just candidate ones. This is a fundamental right in a democracy, and is true whether or not the society is engaged in a 'culture war'. > Instead, there is more oblique messaging like some pastor saying “vaping is a sin!” as a passive aggressive attack on a candidate for office who made their fortune building a vaping business? Actually, this is the historical norm. Especially in American politics, moral grandstanding by various factions is the norm. Think camp revivals and the like. The idea that candidates should be the main focus rather than issues is a fictitious utopian pipe dream.

WhompingWindows 7y ago

What about all the "independent" "non-affiliated" groups who are absolutely tied to a political party? How do you adjudicate those edge cases? It's the edge cases, IMO, that are the real bear here.

gorgoiler 7y ago
If they are absolutely tied to a political party, then they would count towards the quota. If they claim not to have a link then it becomes Facebook’s job to determine if there is one, which seems a lot more tractable than determining if a fact is true or false. Easy at least when the message is “don’t vote for Bob!”, than when it is “we don’t see any harm in GMO wheat”. Unattributed attack ads are pretty obvious but it’s harder to tie issue ads to the party they benefit.

tathougies 7y ago

No thanks. As a member of a small party that seems like it would just make us unable to meet the ridiculous requirements to qualify. As it is right now we can just pay for ads instead of having to meet arbitrary criteria. Thats a much fairer state of things

gorgoiler 7y ago
When you register to appear as an option on a ballot paper, wouldn’t that be sufficient to qualify for your quota of airtime for which you do not have to spend campaign funds?
- tathougies 7y ago
  Sure, but that's not the only kind of political ads. If I believed being vegan were important, and had the money to run an ad in a paper, those are our rights as an American citizen and the newspaper's right as a group of Americans (it is a basic right to agree on a price for something, and then for the newspaper to publish it).
  - gorgoiler 7y ago
    Are you saying that the situation in the US is specifically muddied because politics now incorporates a fight about all aspects of ones life — the Culture Wars? That is to say, old fashioned political messages are no longer common; not much of “vote for Joe to cut property taxes for nurses!” or “don’t vote for Tammy, she will end free downtown parking” any more. Instead, there is more oblique messaging like some pastor saying “vaping is a sin!” as a passive aggressive attack on a candidate for office who made their fortune building a vaping business? This sort of thing feels like a consequence of the over extension of democracy into all parts of life. When you have direct democracy to elect judges and school superintendents, politics becomes everything to the extent that anything said publicly on any topic becomes political speech. That would indeed make it difficult to regulate uncontrolled political ad spamming. Brexit drove politics into everyday life in the UK as well, and it is all consuming. At least one thing I miss about the old days was that politics was about administration of the country.
    - tathougies 7y ago
      > Are you saying that the situation in the US is specifically muddied because politics now incorporates a fight about all aspects of ones life — the Culture Wars? No. Not quite. In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite. The argument is that people are concerned often about issues, not just candidates. This is a historical norm. It is as important (if not more) to allow platforms where everyone can publish and advertise their policy opinions, rather than just candidate ones. This is a fundamental right in a democracy, and is true whether or not the society is engaged in a 'culture war'. > Instead, there is more oblique messaging like some pastor saying “vaping is a sin!” as a passive aggressive attack on a candidate for office who made their fortune building a vaping business? Actually, this is the historical norm. Especially in American politics, moral grandstanding by various factions is the norm. Think camp revivals and the like. The idea that candidates should be the main focus rather than issues is a fictitious utopian pipe dream.