4 ms·

Good, political advertising is pay to win and should be banned across the world

by h1fra 1y ago

raw_anon_1111 1y ago
I agree. But the most toxic extreme things get “engagement” so they will be promoted by the algorithm. So does that help?
- k12sosse 1y ago
  In Canada meta won't pay news publishers for aggregating their content, which is law apparently.. so only fake news and divisive shit lives on their platforms
next_xibalba 1y ago
> pay to win Kamala Harris would like a word.
- johaugum 1y ago
  Paying is necessary, but not sufficient, to win. In her case, the campaign started too late. And despite being a household name, her policies were less known.
  - wdr1 1y ago
    > Paying is necessary Donald Trump would like a word.
    - Yoric 1y ago
      Do I understand correctly that you're saying Donald Trump got lots of support from social networks and TV for free?
- lostlogin 1y ago
  I looked this up as I doubted it. If it was about money, Trump wouldn’t have had a chance. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/11/04/trump-vs-harris-fundraising-race-harris-outraised-trump-3-to-1-with-last-pre-election-report/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/11/04/trump-v...
  - thrance 1y ago
    These are only about direct donations. Most money in politics nowadays is this so-called "dark money". Most billionaires I can think of supported Trump: Musk, Zuckerberg, Bezos, Thiel, Ellison... Lobbies generally favor the Right because they are more easily corrupted (Trump 2x his personal fortune in less than a year of presidency). Right-wing influencers got massive grants from think tanks, Russia and other conservative sources, etc.
    - next_xibalba 1y ago
      From what I can find for the 2024 presidential election: Trump/Republicans spent a total of $2.13 billion vs. $3.37 billion by Harris/Dems. This is inclusive of "dark money". [1] https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race/donald-trump/candidate?id=N00023864 https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race/donald-tr... [2] https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race/donald-trump/expenditures https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race/donald-tr... [3] https://www.campaignnow.com/blog/dems-outspent-gop-2-to-1 https://www.campaignnow.com/blog/dems-outspent-gop-2-to-1 [4] https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/dark-money-hit-record-high-19-billion-2024-federal-races https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/dark... [5] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/live-update/election-news-2024/the-cost-of-this-election https://www.pbs.org/newshour/live-update/election-news-2024/...
- qcnguy 1y ago
  And Hillary Clinton. Thinking you can change strongly held opinions with advertising is wrong.
  - unshavedyak 1y ago
    I imagine the devil is in the details though, no? Ie it definitely changes at least one, right? So the real question is cost vs voted gained.
- Slava_Propanei 1y ago
  [dead]
paulddraper 1y ago
Political advertising is speech.
- illiac786 1y ago
  “Pay to speak”, rather. Still speech, but unfairly distributed.
  - paulddraper 1y ago
    Yes free as in speech versus free as in beer, is the literal expression .
- baol 1y ago
  Free speech does not imply being forced to listen a no-skip ad.
  - paulddraper 1y ago
    Yes. If someone does that, please call law enforcement about the kidnapping.
- Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe 1y ago
  I mean, I guess advertisement for tobacco is speech too then but so what?
theshrike79 1y ago
The problem here is that now the ones who can't advertise are the people actually running as well as the parties. "Influencers" CAN advocate for anyone and their ads will show just fine. So now the one with the most powerful and popular influencers will win. Hint: it's not the left wing people who have far-reaching popular podcasters and tiktokers in the EU...

Good, political advertising is pay to win and should be banned across the world

by h1fra 1y ago

Good, political advertising is pay to win and should be banned across the world

I agree. But the most toxic extreme things get “engagement” so they will be promoted by the algorithm. So does that help?

k12sosse 1y ago
In Canada meta won't pay news publishers for aggregating their content, which is law apparently.. so only fake news and divisive shit lives on their platforms

next_xibalba 1y ago

> pay to win Kamala Harris would like a word.

johaugum 1y ago
Paying is necessary, but not sufficient, to win. In her case, the campaign started too late. And despite being a household name, her policies were less known.
- wdr1 1y ago
  > Paying is necessary Donald Trump would like a word.
  - Yoric 1y ago
    Do I understand correctly that you're saying Donald Trump got lots of support from social networks and TV for free?
lostlogin 1y ago
I looked this up as I doubted it. If it was about money, Trump wouldn’t have had a chance. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/11/04/trump-vs-harris-fundraising-race-harris-outraised-trump-3-to-1-with-last-pre-election-report/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/11/04/trump-v...
- thrance 1y ago
  These are only about direct donations. Most money in politics nowadays is this so-called "dark money". Most billionaires I can think of supported Trump: Musk, Zuckerberg, Bezos, Thiel, Ellison... Lobbies generally favor the Right because they are more easily corrupted (Trump 2x his personal fortune in less than a year of presidency). Right-wing influencers got massive grants from think tanks, Russia and other conservative sources, etc.
  - next_xibalba 1y ago
    From what I can find for the 2024 presidential election: Trump/Republicans spent a total of $2.13 billion vs. $3.37 billion by Harris/Dems. This is inclusive of "dark money". [1] https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race/donald-trump/candidate?id=N00023864 https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race/donald-tr... [2] https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race/donald-trump/expenditures https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race/donald-tr... [3] https://www.campaignnow.com/blog/dems-outspent-gop-2-to-1 https://www.campaignnow.com/blog/dems-outspent-gop-2-to-1 [4] https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/dark-money-hit-record-high-19-billion-2024-federal-races https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/dark... [5] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/live-update/election-news-2024/the-cost-of-this-election https://www.pbs.org/newshour/live-update/election-news-2024/...
qcnguy 1y ago
And Hillary Clinton. Thinking you can change strongly held opinions with advertising is wrong.
- unshavedyak 1y ago
  I imagine the devil is in the details though, no? Ie it definitely changes at least one, right? So the real question is cost vs voted gained.
Slava_Propanei 1y ago
[dead]

paulddraper 1y ago

Political advertising is speech.

illiac786 1y ago
“Pay to speak”, rather. Still speech, but unfairly distributed.
- paulddraper 1y ago
  Yes free as in speech versus free as in beer, is the literal expression .
baol 1y ago
Free speech does not imply being forced to listen a no-skip ad.
- paulddraper 1y ago
  Yes. If someone does that, please call law enforcement about the kidnapping.
Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe 1y ago
I mean, I guess advertisement for tobacco is speech too then but so what?

theshrike79 1y ago

The problem here is that now the ones who can't advertise are the people actually running as well as the parties. "Influencers" CAN advocate for anyone and their ads will show just fine. So now the one with the most powerful and popular influencers will win. Hint: it's not the left wing people who have far-reaching popular podcasters and tiktokers in the EU...