"Part of my job is to recommend where and what ads to buy. As a media strategist, I've always looked at paid social media as a great marketing opportunity. But as a concerned citizen, I've seen many of these platforms weaponized at our expense. In response, Twitter took the extreme measure of simply banning all political ads. I commend them for at least acknowledging the issue and owning that responsibility."
"But the reality is that advertising does play a role and that suppressing it will also disproportionately impact political messages that don't have natural reach. It concentrates power to the headliners and gives more power to highly polarizing content that is more likely to be engaged with. But political ads shouldn't be seen as a binary issue, to be allowed to flourish unregulated or be banned outright. Better safeguards are critical."
"Easy: ban all political advertising not purchased/endorsed by the official candidate. No PACs, no foreign buys. One of the issues that plagued the 2016 US presidential and midterm elections was the spread of false information and the weaponization of the information ecosystem by foreign entities. Typically, this was the result of 'dark' investments not directly related to the candidate (even if they sometimes involved collusion)."
Misinformation spread through political advertising on social media has harmed democratic processes in the US and Europe. A blanket ban on political ads can limit underrepresented voices and concentrate influence among headline figures and polarizing content. Balanced safeguards are necessary to reduce foreign and dark-money manipulation while preserving legitimate political communication. Proposed measures include restricting political ad buys to official candidates, banning third-party and foreign purchases, and broader reforms—three easier to implement, two more difficult, and one unconventional idea—with potential applicability beyond social platforms.
Read at The Drum
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]