.png "back to home page")
Big win for Trump. A decision by Facebook to avoid antagonizing the president — and risking breakup — that will have huge consequences in the 2020 campaign. https://t.co/soqvMxslZ5
— Nick Confessore (@nickconfessore) January 9, 2020
Where I disagree with Boz is that I think limits on targeting for political and issue ads are neutral and fair in the long-run and conducive to healthier democracy. Same with a tightly drawn standard on false claims about opponents. Neither are an attack on Trump.
— Alex Stamos (@alexstamos) January 7, 2020
.@Facebook’s weak plan suggests the company has no idea how seriously it is hurting democracy.
— Ellen L Weintraub (@EllenLWeintraub) January 9, 2020
No one is a bigger believer in transparency than I. But here, proposing ‘transparency’ solutions is window-dressing when Facebook needs to be putting out the housefire it has lit.
/1 https://t.co/0fSJbAGt6C
— Barry Schwartz (@rustybrick) January 9, 2020
FB framed its decision as the only one absent regulation. Remember other companies have changed political ad rules without regulation. There’s no need to believe FB’s lipservice when it knows full well our current lawmakers have no capacity to pass a coherent political ad law.
— Ryan Mac ? (@RMac18) January 9, 2020
Nick's tweet gets at something Congress should investigate: how explicitly did Trump link allowing him to lie in online ads to allowing Facebook to avoid antitrust action? Trump wanted Zuck to do him a favor, though, and Zuck delivered. https://t.co/oJfPxU6yCN
— Brian Beutler (@brianbeutler) January 9, 2020
A big win for anyone who doesn't want biased "fact-checkers" like Politifact and https://t.co/YfkFWCr8VC curtailing public access to political debate, rather than allowing the American public access to that debate and room for independent assessment https://t.co/owzdey36nL
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) January 9, 2020
Facebook will continue to allow people to make false claims & spread disinformation, believing regulation should come from Governments. Ok, then it is clear to me the EU should regulate & take control. A voluntary approach has failed.https://t.co/jgkW8kXuoA
— Guy Verhofstadt (@guyverhofstadt) January 9, 2020
[With respect, I disagree. I think it suggests that Facebook does not care.] https://t.co/VQ3FHfHVwV
— Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) January 9, 2020
Every single employee at Facebook knows where the money for their paycheck comes from. And has for a long time. It’s fair to assume they're ok with it. https://t.co/HUPcoZhcUP via @voxdotcom
— Mike Monteiro? (@monteiro) January 9, 2020
Well there will be no confusion about Facebook's role in providing a platform for the hijacking of our democracy. And the worst part is that they regard this as a principled stance.
— Sherrilyn Ifill (@Sifill_LDF) January 9, 2020
Facebook Says It Won’t Back Down From Allowing Lies in Political Ads https://t.co/TS1CmUCipg
I'm disappointed with the Facebook ad decision. Not a smart move for the company; targeting limits and a minimal standard on claims about opponents would represent a defensible, non-partisan and helpful position.
— Alex Stamos (@alexstamos) January 9, 2020
From chat with @mathewi on this:https://t.co/9CAlO0xryK
While I’m glad Facebook has reiterated its support for the Honest Ads Act and that it will come into fuller compliance with the ad transparency requirements it establishes, the core problem is an unwillingness to remove demonstrably false content in political advertising. https://t.co/2jyggA1p9K
— Mark Warner (@MarkWarner) January 9, 2020
Kudos to @Facebook for not restricting ads, like the major media demanded | Facebook won’t limit political ad targeting or stop false claims under new ad rules https://t.co/Lr4v5JwPAM
— Dan Gainor (@dangainor) January 9, 2020
There it is. @facebook, knowing that disinformation brings in more ad dollars than facts, is choosing to accept hundreds of millions for lies.
— Sleeping Giants (@slpng_giants) January 9, 2020
This, from a platform which has already been blamed for a genocide in Myanmar for spreading disinformation. https://t.co/dLRC65WvaW
Remember when Zuckerberg was toying with running for president, and Sandberg was a leading voice for women's empowerment? This is the ultimate story of greed gone bad. This company's legacy is crap! https://t.co/DJbEH8f15M
— Amy Siskind ?️? (@Amy_Siskind) January 9, 2020
Facebook's decision is a major boon to the Trump campaign and the rest of the Republicans that view disinformation as a necessary tactic for a victorious strategy. https://t.co/gPzacm6T3c
— Dan Pfeiffer (@danpfeiffer) January 9, 2020
PM at meeting at Facebook: "Maybe the button/link could be called 'See fewer lies'? Heheh."
— Michael Mallin (@mmallin) January 9, 2020
Others at meeting: [angry glares] https://t.co/kli0JPL7RT
Facebook opposed my bipartisan Honest Ads Act for months, came around only after everything blew up, opposed many privacy leg. proposals & now say they won’t do anything about ad truthfulness without regulation. Just another reason I want to be President. https://t.co/dBKeSlV0gJ
— Amy Klobuchar (@amyklobuchar) January 9, 2020
Outrageous. This is Facebook’s idea of change? #MarkZuckerberg, you STILL take politicians’ money, STILL refuse to fact check their ads and STILL microtarget their lies to your +2 billion users. Mark, the demagogues of the world thank you!https://t.co/YbblXHC8LQ
— Sacha Baron Cohen (@SachaBaronCohen) January 9, 2020
facebook makes its stance on political ads and misinformation clear — it’s not gonna changehttps://t.co/Z9bWTYkdNM
— rat king (@MikeIsaac) January 9, 2020
Facebook is paying for its own glowing fake news coverage, so it's not surprising they're standing their ground on letting political figures lie to you. Facebook needs real competition and accountability so our democracy isn't held hostage to their desire to make money. https://t.co/bhy5bVGoAP
— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) January 9, 2020
it will be interesting to see the implementation of these tools. but i do wonder how many people know where even to find the ad transparency screen. historically, and totally anecdotally, i've had to walk so many friends and colleagues through this. https://t.co/JTDEyepJpF
— Tony Romm (@TonyRomm) January 9, 2020
I think it may be a common view that Trump "won." But the implication of the phrase "risking a breakup" is that the president won by abusing his power to extort a personal concession. Abuse of power for private gain is the definition of corruption, which is unworthy of praise. https://t.co/yExi1KdRPE
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 9, 2020
Something I don't understand about Facebook's lengthy, tortured decision-making on its political ads policy:
— Shira Ovide (@ShiraOvide) January 9, 2020
The point of founder control is the ability to act decisively. Just not on this. https://t.co/0FpPDlscrC
NEW: Facebook won’t limit political ad targeting or prohibit them from lying under new ad rules announced today, but will allow users to opt out if they're tired of the 2020 election. tip @techmeme https://t.co/7URmUpzdPW
— Tony Romm (@TonyRomm) January 9, 2020
We listened... now kthanksbye. https://t.co/ZTWpx6qC4y
— Donie O'Sullivan (@donie) January 9, 2020
It looks like we will need legislation on targeting, as we called for in our election security report from the Stanford Cyber Policy Center:https://t.co/7iKyrGY7Qj
— Alex Stamos (@alexstamos) January 9, 2020
Another discussion with @pkafka: https://t.co/DyLmeb7Bz4
What complete garbage. 2nd graph is what matters here. “The company also said it would not end so-called microtargeting for political ads, which lets campaigns home in on a sliver of Facebook’s users — a tactic that critics say is ideal for spreading divisive or misleading info.” https://t.co/nfJYjMCwSt
— Jason Kint (@jason_kint) January 9, 2020
https://t.co/lTuI0yUq7t FB does not care for the truth. It is poisoning minds by allowing lies on FB as long as people pay.
— Jim (@Jimparedes) January 9, 2020
Social Media is causing the media equivalent of climate change, and Facebook is its Koch Industries. https://t.co/4HD15UlFqd
— Buzz Andersen (@buzz) January 9, 2020
I think Nick has nailed it. This is just about preserving the status quo and protecting interests (and has little to do with misreadings of John Rawls). Once again, Zuckerberg decides he has no obligation to the integrity of the information ecosystem- only to the bottom line. https://t.co/k7HMsc7wXM
— Justin Hendrix (@justinhendrix) January 9, 2020
Buckle up. The green light to lie has just been set to permanent through 2020. https://t.co/FjTGR090wA
— ilyse hogue (@ilyseh) January 9, 2020
So Facebook Cleared Things Up for 2020: Politicians Can Totally Lie to Users https://t.co/GTWJiisu22 via @vice
— juju (@jjsmokkieBOY57) January 9, 2020
Facebook's new ad policy sorta reads to me like an acknowledgement that Facebook is too big to moderate https://t.co/X4jXBrZcqG via @vicenews
— David Uberti (@DavidUberti) January 9, 2020
LYING OK ON FACEBOOK#Facebook Will NOT CHANGE Its Policies On Allowing Lies In Political Ads
— Michael O'Grady (@mog7546) January 9, 2020
“We don’t think decisions about political ads should be made by private companies," Facebook executive#TRUMP CAN LIE ALL HE WANTS#MOG#MAGA #Resist
https://t.co/z5Ys0qEHrE
Facebook Says It Won't Change Its Policies On Allowing Lies In Political Ads https://t.co/YgYnj7wCGt
— Jeffrey Levin (@jilevin) January 9, 2020
Facebook Says It Won't Change Its Policies On Allowing Lies In Political Ads https://t.co/jrzDJycw7p
— ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ (@PranavDixit) January 9, 2020
NEW: After much pressure address online political ads, Facebook says it will give US users the ability to see fewer of them, starting this summer.
— Ryan Browne (@Ryan_Browne_) January 9, 2020
It comes after Twitter implemented an outright ban and Google moved to end political ad microtargeting. https://t.co/xkYxxfz4JH
Facebook has released a raft of small changes to its rules around political ads, including giving consumers the option to block political ads from their feeds.https://t.co/iTmJpF1slY
— Axios (@axios) January 9, 2020
So here it is. Zuck has taken his orders from Trump. Facebook is refusing to ban lies in political ads. It's refusing to ban microtargeting of political ads. Zuckerberg has sanctioned the delivery of toxic lies to voters in darkness...for profit. https://t.co/cHU2idzbhV
— Carole Cadwalladr (@carolecadwalla) January 9, 2020
Hey, look! The New York Times *does* know the word "lie"!
— Holly Figueroa O'Reilly (@AynRandPaulRyan) January 9, 2020
Now use it on Trump & his administration instead of euphemisms like "dissemble", "falsehood", "misleading", etc
Facebook Says It Won’t Back Down From Allowing Lies in Political Ads https://t.co/ccwUNvHsP5#DeleteFacebook
Facebook decides to continue polluting democracy. Delete the app. https://t.co/mUBnzNLiIh
— Andreas Thorsheim (@Athornor) January 9, 2020
Facebook says won’t back down from allowing lies in political ads, via @mikeisaac https://t.co/KSZb6xm66I via @NYTimes
— CeciliaKang (@ceciliakang) January 9, 2020
As a IT Professional I find this unacceptable. It only furthers dishonest political behaviour in the digital realm.
— Scott Huffman for Congress (@HuffmanForNC) January 9, 2020
When elected I will sponsor a "Digital Truth Advertising" bill. #nc13
Facebook Says It Won’t Back Down From Allowing Lies in Political Ads https://t.co/6xjoB1M6JY
facebook makes its stance on political ads and misinformation clear — it’s not gonna changehttps://t.co/Z9bWTYkdNM
— rat king (@MikeIsaac) January 9, 2020
Delete your Facebook account. https://t.co/58IpsUts0j
— Ken Tremendous (@KenTremendous) January 9, 2020
In an election year, micro targeting is especially erosive and dangerous. Shame on @Facebook for its blasé attitude towards the pivotal role it can play in supporting or stripping our engagement with democracy. https://t.co/4f4ptTXCgd
— Nora Benavidez (@AttorneyNora) January 9, 2020
If Facebook is going to allow politicians to lie in advertisements--something it would never allow a private company to do for its products--then it ought to allow all FB members to opt-out from seeing ALL political advertising. https://t.co/Bh05NgzRf1
— Bruce Bartlett (@BruceBartlett) January 9, 2020
Facebook again declines to limit political ad targeting https://t.co/BVtjgl9oqo
— Los Angeles Times (@latimes) January 9, 2020
So Facebook Cleared Things Up for 2020: Politicians Can Totally Lie to Users https://t.co/1t3dhM6ItY
— juju's other (@smokesdad28) January 9, 2020
HELPING #TRUMP
— Michael O'Grady (@mog7546) January 9, 2020
So #Facebook Cleared Things Up for 2020:
POLITICIANS CAN TOTALLY LIE TO USERS
Hitting select audiences with highly tailored messages was key to the Trump campaign’s dominance on the platform four years ago.#MOG#MAGA #Resist#Resisters https://t.co/tubMLUw89i
In a world where only certain people and parties deliberately use lies as a political strategy, we shouldn't pretend that Facebook's decision to let politicians lie without restriction is politically neutral. https://t.co/6m987tZDfZ
— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) January 9, 2020
Facebook Says It Won’t Back Down From Allowing Lies in Political Ads
— Stephanie Kennedy (@WordswithSteph) January 9, 2020
Again, Trump flagrantly abuses his power, succeeds in having his corrupt demands met.
Prospect of Facebook’s willful dissemination of disinformation doesn’t bode well for 2020 election https://t.co/ZfAhoBihAq
Facebook Says It Won’t Back Down From Allowing Lies in Political Ads - The New York Times #DeleteFacebook ??? https://t.co/ipkwaTkycP
— Juan Alderete (@J_Alderete) January 9, 2020
I once had a Facebook ad for Drinking at Disney shot down because I failed to specify my target audience to be 21+. For a book. But sure, let's not fact check political ads. What could go wrong?! https://t.co/ENHuFH5Srq
— Rhiannon (@DefiniteDisney) January 10, 2020
Deplorable https://t.co/n9xzSrUx70
— John Allen Paulos (@JohnAllenPaulos) January 10, 2020
Facebook refuses to stop actively promoting politicians lying to you, as long as the politicians give them lots of money.
— Alan Ferrier (@alanferrier) January 9, 2020
Today would be a good day to #DeleteFacebook.https://t.co/6LllrzoA0d