Columbia Journalism Review: Who is right about political ads, Twitter or Facebook?

Columbia Journalism Review: Who is right about political ads, Twitter or Facebook? . “As the 2020 federal election draws closer, the issue of online political advertising is becoming more important, and the differences in how the platforms are approaching it are more obvious. Twitter has chosen to ban political advertising, but questions remain about how it plans to define that term, and whether banning ads will do more harm than good. Meanwhile, Facebook has gone in the opposite direction, saying it will not even fact-check political ads. So whose strategy is the best, Twitter’s or Facebook’s?”

New York Times: Buckle Up for Another Facebook Election

New York Times: Buckle Up for Another Facebook Election. “The social network has spent much of the past three years apologizing for its inaction during the 2016 election, when its platform was overrun with hyperpartisan misinformation, some of it Russian, that was amplified by its own algorithms. And ahead of 2020, some people wondered if Mr. Zuckerberg — who is, by his own admission, uncomfortable with Facebook’s power — would do everything he could to step out of the political crossfire. Instead, Mr. Zuckerberg has embraced Facebook’s central role in elections — not only by giving politicians a pass on truth, but by preserving the elements of its advertising platforms that proved to be a decisive force in 2016.”

The Brookings Institution: Twitter’s ban on political advertisements hurts our democracy

The Brookings Institution: Twitter’s ban on political advertisements hurts our democracy. “Even if social media companies could successfully define electioneering advertisements, the benefits of such a policy are unclear. Rather than being a well-thought policy, the decision seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to the criticisms about the role of the social media in politics.”

CNN: Facebook says it’s ‘not deaf’ to criticism. But it will still let politicians lie in ads

CNN: Facebook says it’s ‘not deaf’ to criticism. But it will still let politicians lie in ads. “In a blog post, Rob Leathern, who oversees Facebook’s political ad library, said the company was not making any major revisions to its policies on political ads. Leathern did however ask political leaders to establish new rules that would govern digital political advertising.” Taking responsibility for your company’s actions is soooo… hang on, need to go find an era where giant corporations took responsibility for their actions…

The Verge: Mike Bloomberg has spent nearly $15 million to be in your Google search results

The Verge: Mike Bloomberg has spent nearly $15 million to be in your Google search results. “According to Google, Bloomberg’s campaign has spent a staggering $14,849,500 on political ads since the candidate announced his run at the end of November; overall, Bloomberg has spent nearly $200 million on his run for president of the United States.”

CNET: Spotify hits pause on US political ads for next year

CNET: Spotify hits pause on US political ads for next year. “Spotify will suspend political advertising early next year in the US. Spotify is the world’s leading streaming music service by subscribers, but its biggest audience is people who listen to ads so they can hear music free — 141 million of them worldwide each month.”

CNN: Facebook promised transparency on political ads. Its system crashed days before the UK election

CNN: Facebook promised transparency on political ads. Its system crashed days before the UK election. “Tens of thousands of political ads went missing from Facebook’s archive this week, according to researchers, just days before voters go to the polls in the most important UK election for decades. A spokesperson for Facebook (FB) confirmed its library went down but could not say how many political ads disappeared. The problem affected several countries, and Facebook prioritized fixing the UK database because of the imminent election.”