3 ms·

The issue with fact-checking Facebook ads vs. TV or newspaper is one of targeting and timing. Facebook ads can be micro-targeted to the point where they're onl

by jlwits 7y ago

The issue with fact-checking Facebook ads vs. TV or newspaper is one of targeting and timing. Facebook ads can be micro-targeted to the point where they're only seen by a very small audience, which is simply not possible in mainstream TV or newspaper. If you have a misleading campaign on TV (e.g., swift boat stuff on Kerry in '04), that can be recognized and called out (not that the dems were super effective at that then...). However with Facebook, it's much more challenging given the small sample size to (1) see all of the ads people are seeing and (2) figure out who has been exposed to them. So at the end of the day, it's tougher to identify misinformation, and then if you do identify it it's pretty much impossible to re-message the same audience with the correct info. Add timing to that (many campaigns are only up for 24-48 hours) and you start to see why this is a fundamentally different beast from TV and newspaper ads. One of the blunter but potentially effective solutions is to have a much larger minimum audience size, which is what Google moved to (although still at a pretty small scale).

WorldMaker 7y ago
Not to mention that Facebook for some time also enabled resharing those micro-targeted ads, which would then show those ads on friends/followers' newsfeed without the Sponsored Content notice, thus further blurring the lines between what was "legitimately" viral content and what originated as micro-targeted paid advertising.
jstrong 7y ago
in my mind, the facebook policy is limited in ways that mitigate the problems you present. the "hands off" policy (as I understand it) only applies to elected officials, meaning there is some level of inherent accountability (in significant part due to legal requirements to disclose the source of campaign ads), and a built-in limit to how 'fringe' the information will be (since an elected official, having been elected, has some amount of public support). A relatively small number of actors with established political support, who are generally under high levels of scrutiny and accountability for the things they say, ads they run, etc., are subject to the policy, not everyone.

by jlwits 7y ago

WorldMaker 7y ago

Not to mention that Facebook for some time also enabled resharing those micro-targeted ads, which would then show those ads on friends/followers' newsfeed without the Sponsored Content notice, thus further blurring the lines between what was "legitimately" viral content and what originated as micro-targeted paid advertising.

jstrong 7y ago

in my mind, the facebook policy is limited in ways that mitigate the problems you present. the "hands off" policy (as I understand it) only applies to elected officials, meaning there is some level of inherent accountability (in significant part due to legal requirements to disclose the source of campaign ads), and a built-in limit to how 'fringe' the information will be (since an elected official, having been elected, has some amount of public support). A relatively small number of actors with established political support, who are generally under high levels of scrutiny and accountability for the things they say, ads they run, etc., are subject to the policy, not everyone.