6 ms·

Indeed -- quite the timely response: Allow people to turn off ads advocating racial justice and equity.

elicash 6y ago
This is a great point. Will a person who turns these ads off even UNDERSTAND that they're not allowing a Black Lives Matter organization to let them know about upcoming events? How will that be explained to the user? The advertiser might only even be sharing the ads with people set up on a recurring contribution to inform them how to stay involved.
- vorpalhex 6y ago
  Would you be ok with the inverse situation? You could allow ads from an organization you'd support, but you'd also be allowing ads from organizations contrary to your own beliefs?
  - elicash 6y ago
    That's literally the status quo. Yes, I probably favor that over this. My point is three-fold: 1. There's no education about what this actually means. This has been pitched as during the 2020 election, hide ads from candidates. But it's not that. The coverage is unclear and it's unlikely Facebook will fully explain. 2. There's no flexibility to let people change the settings how they truly wish. Maybe I want to hear from organizations I belong to but don't want to see ads from political figures, for example. There's no setting for this. Keep in mind, you can be a dues-paying member of an org, follow them on Facebook, and still rarely see their organic posts. Facebook limited to reach of Facebook pages to encourage advertising, so simply being a Fan isn't a reliable way to see updates. 3. The meaning of "politics" is unclear. It allows ads from polluting companies, but not from environmental orgs. The restriction applies to Black Lives Matter, but possibly not to organizations raising money for police.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- DenisM 6y ago
  > Will a person who turns these ads off even UNDERSTAND that they're not allowing Do you not find this approach patronizing? I'm not jesting, your comments are well-informed and I am better off for having read them. Still I am curious why is it that you do not believe that people can make reasonable choices about content blocking and correctly interpret "sensitive topics that are heavily debated, may influence the outcome of an election or result in/relate to existing or proposed legislation.".
  - elicash 6y ago
    It's a fair question. But it's because the news reporting about it has been incorrect and has often suggested that it only applies to campaigns. That's why. I'm using reporters as a proxy for the public. And also, much of the public will learn about the feature from these reports. As a political advertiser who jumps through huge hoops about what is and isn't allowed, what the definitions of different terms are, and how it's constantly changing and hard to keep up with even as a professional -- yeah, I can't expect others to have the time to keep up with it. And even if they DO keep up with it, the standards are at times vague and enforced in weird, unexpected ways. What's a "sensitive" topic? Is talking about COVID masks a sensitive topic? I mean, it's recommended (now) by the CDC. But also, some people are anti-mask. There's a clear partisan divide on the mask issue. Is selling masks political? If a person wants to avoid Biden/Trump ads, should they now no longer see ads about a good deal on masks to stop spread of the coronavirus? (Companies that sell political t-shirts, even though they're not a political organization, have to be marked as politics. The content of the ad is important, not just the type of organization.) But also, even if you're fully informed, there's little flexibility. You can't make an exception for an organization that you're a dues-paying member of so you can stay updated about how your money is being spent, for example. Finally, that definition of social issues isn't the ONLY one (which, by the way, Facebook won't even describe to users who don't seek it out). Each individual issue area has its own definition. There are definitions about what is a "gun issue." On civil rights. On the environment. (Click "United States" at this link: https://www.facebook.com/business/help/313752069181919?id=288762101909005 https://www.facebook.com/business/help/313752069181919?id=28... ) This is super complicated and requires a large investment in time to fully understand. I admittedly might be hyper-aware of these complications as somebody who has had to go through all this documentation to know what does and does not have to be marked as "politics" before I submit the ad for approval. (If you don't mark it properly, your ad can be delayed for days -- and politics is fast-moving.) Maybe Facebook users don't care. But there's no sense that I have from the way it was released that they sought user feedback, either from political orgs or even from the daily users of their website. What types of settings do they want? What kind of flexibility is needed? I don't see any evidence these issues were even grappled with. That's frustrating as an advertiser, that it seems like they just started with "how do we have fewer headaches?"

This is a great point. Will a person who turns these ads off even UNDERSTAND that they're not allowing a Black Lives Matter organization to let them know about upcoming events? How will that be explained to the user? The advertiser might only even be sharing the ads with people set up on a recurring contribution to inform them how to stay involved.

vorpalhex 6y ago
Would you be ok with the inverse situation? You could allow ads from an organization you'd support, but you'd also be allowing ads from organizations contrary to your own beliefs?
- elicash 6y ago
  That's literally the status quo. Yes, I probably favor that over this. My point is three-fold: 1. There's no education about what this actually means. This has been pitched as during the 2020 election, hide ads from candidates. But it's not that. The coverage is unclear and it's unlikely Facebook will fully explain. 2. There's no flexibility to let people change the settings how they truly wish. Maybe I want to hear from organizations I belong to but don't want to see ads from political figures, for example. There's no setting for this. Keep in mind, you can be a dues-paying member of an org, follow them on Facebook, and still rarely see their organic posts. Facebook limited to reach of Facebook pages to encourage advertising, so simply being a Fan isn't a reliable way to see updates. 3. The meaning of "politics" is unclear. It allows ads from polluting companies, but not from environmental orgs. The restriction applies to Black Lives Matter, but possibly not to organizations raising money for police.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
DenisM 6y ago
> Will a person who turns these ads off even UNDERSTAND that they're not allowing Do you not find this approach patronizing? I'm not jesting, your comments are well-informed and I am better off for having read them. Still I am curious why is it that you do not believe that people can make reasonable choices about content blocking and correctly interpret "sensitive topics that are heavily debated, may influence the outcome of an election or result in/relate to existing or proposed legislation.".
- elicash 6y ago
  It's a fair question. But it's because the news reporting about it has been incorrect and has often suggested that it only applies to campaigns. That's why. I'm using reporters as a proxy for the public. And also, much of the public will learn about the feature from these reports. As a political advertiser who jumps through huge hoops about what is and isn't allowed, what the definitions of different terms are, and how it's constantly changing and hard to keep up with even as a professional -- yeah, I can't expect others to have the time to keep up with it. And even if they DO keep up with it, the standards are at times vague and enforced in weird, unexpected ways. What's a "sensitive" topic? Is talking about COVID masks a sensitive topic? I mean, it's recommended (now) by the CDC. But also, some people are anti-mask. There's a clear partisan divide on the mask issue. Is selling masks political? If a person wants to avoid Biden/Trump ads, should they now no longer see ads about a good deal on masks to stop spread of the coronavirus? (Companies that sell political t-shirts, even though they're not a political organization, have to be marked as politics. The content of the ad is important, not just the type of organization.) But also, even if you're fully informed, there's little flexibility. You can't make an exception for an organization that you're a dues-paying member of so you can stay updated about how your money is being spent, for example. Finally, that definition of social issues isn't the ONLY one (which, by the way, Facebook won't even describe to users who don't seek it out). Each individual issue area has its own definition. There are definitions about what is a "gun issue." On civil rights. On the environment. (Click "United States" at this link: https://www.facebook.com/business/help/313752069181919?id=288762101909005 https://www.facebook.com/business/help/313752069181919?id=28... ) This is super complicated and requires a large investment in time to fully understand. I admittedly might be hyper-aware of these complications as somebody who has had to go through all this documentation to know what does and does not have to be marked as "politics" before I submit the ad for approval. (If you don't mark it properly, your ad can be delayed for days -- and politics is fast-moving.) Maybe Facebook users don't care. But there's no sense that I have from the way it was released that they sought user feedback, either from political orgs or even from the daily users of their website. What types of settings do they want? What kind of flexibility is needed? I don't see any evidence these issues were even grappled with. That's frustrating as an advertiser, that it seems like they just started with "how do we have fewer headaches?"