This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
Title
Thread by @jack: "We've made the decision to stop all political advertising on Twitter globally. We believe political message reach should be earned, not boug [...]"
I agree. It's a good starting point for addressing problems with Twitter. However, the policy doesn't address the propaganda coming directly from politicians via the platform.
I agree. It's a good starting point for addressing problems with Twitter. However, the policy doesn't address the propaganda coming directly from politicians via the platform.
One of the problems with advertising in particular (which has come up a lot on Facebook) is that they're effectively private. There's no visibility into what ads are being created, who they're...
One of the problems with advertising in particular (which has come up a lot on Facebook) is that they're effectively private. There's no visibility into what ads are being created, who they're being shown to, etc. and they can be hyper-targeted to small groups of users instead of needing to be something where all viewers see the same thing.
But then after the article came out, this woman got in touch with me. And she was from Ebbw Vale, and she told me about all this stuff that she'd seen on Facebook. I was like, "What stuff?" And she said it was all this quite scary stuff about immigration, and especially about Turkey. So I tried to find it. But there was nothing there. Because there's no archive of ads that people had seen or what had been pushed into their news feeds. No trace of anything, gone completely dark. And this referendum that will have this profound effect forever on Britain -- it's already had a profound effect: the Japanese car manufacturers that came to Wales and the north east to replace the mining jobs -- they are already going because of Brexit.
And this entire referendum took place in darkness, because it took place on Facebook. And what happens on Facebook stays on Facebook, because only you see your news feed, and then it vanishes, so it's impossible to research anything. So we have no idea who saw what ads or what impact they had, or what data was used to target these people. Or even who placed the ads, or how much money was spent, or even what nationality they were.
But Facebook does. Facebook has these answers, and it's refused to give them to us.
I'm suspicious, what is Twitter gaining by not having political ads? And what's to stop people from making ads a few degrees left of political and/or promoting their content outside of Twitter's...
I'm suspicious, what is Twitter gaining by not having political ads? And what's to stop people from making ads a few degrees left of political and/or promoting their content outside of Twitter's control and making it into ads? Maybe I'm holding Twitter to an impossible standard, but they want to be a universal platform of communication and not want to have to tidy up or show people the door when things get rowdy, and that's kind of impossible these days.
I'll take it. Baby steps.
Now get the Nazis and bots out of there.
I agree. It's a good starting point for addressing problems with Twitter. However, the policy doesn't address the propaganda coming directly from politicians via the platform.
Was paid advertising ever a major problem on Twitter? I would imagine the Russian botnet admins laughing at the idea of spending cash on ads?
One of the problems with advertising in particular (which has come up a lot on Facebook) is that they're effectively private. There's no visibility into what ads are being created, who they're being shown to, etc. and they can be hyper-targeted to small groups of users instead of needing to be something where all viewers see the same thing.
Carole Cadwalladr (the journalist that broke the Cambridge Analytica story) talks about it in her TED talk, which is really good (and only 15 minutes long): Facebook's role in Brexit — and the threat to democracy
I guess I never saw it spelled out this clearly, scary stuff! Gotta watch that talk, later (btw Tildes needs a “save” button).
It has one! It's "Bookmark".
Am I blind?!? Thanks.
I'm suspicious, what is Twitter gaining by not having political ads? And what's to stop people from making ads a few degrees left of political and/or promoting their content outside of Twitter's control and making it into ads? Maybe I'm holding Twitter to an impossible standard, but they want to be a universal platform of communication and not want to have to tidy up or show people the door when things get rowdy, and that's kind of impossible these days.
Maybe they're just not interested in going through what Facebook did with political ads.