Late last night local time, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey posted on his platform in a series of tweets that his company will ban all political advertising globally coming next month.
The U.S will be having their Presidential elections next year and Jack wanted out of the 2020 campaign.
We’ve made the decision to stop all political advertising on Twitter globally. We believe political message reach should be earned, not bought. Why? A few reasons…🧵
— jack (@jack) October 30, 2019
The ban covers candidate ads and issues ads with exceptions to ads encouraging voter registration. Jack announced that a full policy concerning this ban will be available to the public on November 15th, 7 days shy of the official day when the ban becomes effective.
In addition, we need more forward-looking political ad regulation (very difficult to do). Ad transparency requirements are progress, but not enough. The internet provides entirely new capabilities, and regulators need to think past the present day to ensure a level playing field.
— jack (@jack) October 30, 2019
Twitter’s decision comes after mounting pressure on Facebook and how it handles political ads. The giant social media company recently changed its policy on political ads posted on the platform that now allowed it to post ads that encouraged disinformation even after being fact-checked to be false – Facebook now prohibits political ads from being fact-checked.
https://twitter.com/amahnke/status/1179768391848079360
The growing pressure has now made Twitter make this move and has been lauded by the Biden campaign who has been on the receiving end of the misleading and false ads run by Donald Trump’s reelection campaign.
The 2020 Presidential candidate sent letters to Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and news media outlets to stop hosting false and misleading political ads.
“No company should allow itself to be a tool to mislead the public on any issue, let alone on one as important as the health of our democracy. It is one thing to allow President Trump the platform to spread falsehoods from his own account; it is quite another to profit from paid ads echoing the same lies.
We ask that you make that distinction — between the personal account of a politician and paid advertising content — just as Twitter does in every other context,” the letters read.
Facebook rejected their pleas.
“Just setting up my subtweet” https://t.co/XDoM0KUHHk
— Lauren Goode (@LaurenGoode) October 30, 2019
This is about as direct a potshot I've ever seen Dorsey take at Zuckerberg https://t.co/vblmPJarqF
— Brian Merchant (@bcmerchant) October 30, 2019
Praising this ban, Bill Russo, deputy communications director for the Biden campaign said in a statement, “We appreciate that Twitter recognizes that they should not permit disproven smears, like those from the Trump campaign, to appear in advertisements on their platform.”
“It would be unfortunate to suggest that the only option available to social media companies to do so is the full withdrawal of political advertising, but when faced with a choice between ad dollars and the integrity of our democracy, it is encouraging that, for once, revenue did not win out,” he added.
https://twitter.com/kateconger/status/1189650691876278272
Encouraging Decision
Twitter’s new ban also got applauded by the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee who has been looking into Russia’s use of social media platforms including Facebook and Twitter to interfere in the US’s elections since Trump got elected.
Senate Intel Cmte Chairman @MarkWarner on @jack announcing they will stop political advertising on Twitter: "Going forward, and again, I hope that Zuckerberg and others may end up taking some guidance from what Dorsey and Twitter has done."
— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) October 30, 2019
Good Call
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) called the move a good call coming after pressing Mark Zuckerberg in a hearing held last week criticising Facebook’s unwillingness to fact-check political ads.
“Technology — and social media especially — have a powerful responsibility in preserving the integrity of our elections. Not allowing for paid disinformation is one of the most basic, ethical decisions a company can make.”
This is a good call. Technology – and social media especially – has a powerful responsibility in preserving the integrity of our elections.
Not allowing for paid disinformation is one of the most basic, ethical decisions a company can make.
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) October 30, 2019
This ban wasn’t received well by Donald Trump’s re-election campaign.
Twitter bans political ads in yet another attempt by the left to silence Trump and conservatives. Wouldn’t be surprised if @twitter lifted the ban after 2020.
Statement: pic.twitter.com/4ZdHGJw3js
— Brad Parscale (@parscale) October 30, 2019
It is worth noting that Twitter’s revenue from campaign ads is smaller than what Parscale states – the actual figure is just $3 million. According to Jasmine Enberg, a senior analyst for research company eMarketet, political advertising isn’t likely a critical part of Twitter’s business.
Facebook should follow suit
“Mark Zuckerberg has said he doesn’t want the responsibility of blocking false political ads. If that’s really the case, and not a desperate attempt to placate the far-right, Facebook should follow Twitter’s lead and stop running political ads on its site altogether,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) said in a tweet.
Facebook will still continue hosting political ads despite calls from its employees to change this policy.
Facebook says Political Ad dollars are less than 0.5% of revenues — based on 2019 consensus revs that is ~$350 million of political ad dollars
Twitter has said Political Ad dollars are less than $3 million, which implies about 0.1% of revs based on 2019 consensus $FB $TWTR pic.twitter.com/hjDgSZxolo
— Rich Greenfield, LightShed 🔦 (@RichLightShed) October 30, 2019
Also, basically no financial downside for Twitter on this. On their earnings call last week CFO Ned Segal said ad revenue from political ads around the 2018 midterms was " less than $3 million for us."
so yeah, this won't really impact their business at all
— Kurt Wagner (@KurtWagner8) October 30, 2019
“At times of social tension, there has often been an urge to pull back on free expression…We will be best served over the long term by resisting this urge and defending free expression,” Mark Zuckerberg said.
This is the right thing to do for democracy in America and all over the world.
What say you, @Facebook? https://t.co/dRgipKHzUG
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 30, 2019
Despite Zuckerberg’s strong statement today on keeping political ads vs. Twitter banning them, please recall he said the same to me about Alex Jones whom he said would stay on @facebook until he was later de-platformed: Your Move, Facebook https://t.co/GEXqM3Sfkx
— Kara Swisher (@karaswisher) October 31, 2019
https://twitter.com/davidgura/status/1189727176914079744
::turns head, awkwardly looks towards menlo park::https://t.co/dJBlJyPfFX
— rat king 🐀 (@MikeIsaac) October 30, 2019
https://twitter.com/jonlovett/status/1189636448363769856
Wow. Big move by @jack, and a bigger contrast to @Facebook's increasingly problematic policy positions. https://t.co/nm9rckaKHc
— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) October 30, 2019
This ban presents a new problem for Twitter
Techcrunch reports that Twitter is now submitting itself for a different kind of punishment as it will now have to be an arbiter of what is political instead of being the arbiter of what is appropriate.
For instance, it‘s not credible for us to say: “We’re working hard to stop people from gaming our systems to spread misleading info, buuut if someone pays us to target and force people to see their political ad…well…they can say whatever they want! 😉”
— jack (@jack) October 30, 2019
https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/1189643454957047808
This isn't over though. There's going to be a lot of debate about what Twitter considers an "issue" ad. Are ads related to education, health, immigration, etc "political"?? Everything is kinda political.https://t.co/iF9umjxOXG
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) October 30, 2019
Meanwhile Mark Zuckerberg is opening Facebook's earnings call by doubling down on his stance on political ads. Says he'll "continue" to weigh whether to accept political ads but so far he's landed on allowing them.
— Brian Fung (@b_fung) October 30, 2019
https://twitter.com/danriffle/status/1189647555723960320
I know people are excited that Twitter's taking a stand, and I appreciate that they're taking these questions seriously. But the inclusion of "climate change" here is an example of why I think banning political ads is more problematic than it might seem. https://t.co/0VlmfshQn8
— Will Oremus (@WillOremus) October 30, 2019
It’s a right decision and will be a hard one but even if the platform fails to get this right, it can at least say it tried.
It'll be very interesting to see the exceptions. https://t.co/V9bMB0arQx
— Tim Carney (@TPCarney) October 30, 2019
What they’re saying
https://twitter.com/panzer/status/1189637540787015680
you have to imagine that after FB dunking on twitter for so many years with copies and product unveils that Jack is feeling p good right now
— rat king 🐀 (@MikeIsaac) October 30, 2019
Twitter bans political ads.
Remember to buy stocks of companies when they do something good for society, not just for themselves. https://t.co/5KR62gkGRz
— DavePell@threads (@davepell) October 30, 2019
Whoa. Remarkable to see Twitter leading on this (due respect to Microsoft for doing this back in 2018). Great time for Facebook and YouTube to step up. https://t.co/UdT0kc0S2G
— Rand Fishkin (follow @randderuiter on Threads) (@randfish) October 30, 2019
When I tweeted that I think it's a mistake to ban political advertising, some folks at Twitter asked why. I explained. Apparently, I was not terribly persuasive. 😕 1/ https://t.co/3W3LKwHWKa
— Jeff (Gutenberg Parenthesis) Jarvis (@jeffjarvis) October 30, 2019
https://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/1189643463685369856
… But have no fear. Politicians will still be allowed to lie and deceive on Twitter. They just won't be able to pay for the privilege.
— Dan Primack (@danprimack) October 30, 2019
This is a smart marketing move aimed squarely at Facebook.
1. Twitter makes less money from political advertising than Facebook does.
2. Twitter wants, nay needs, to position itself as "better than" Facebook.
3. The news is timed with Facebook earnings.https://t.co/RxpjeWquLl— Emil Protalinski (@EPro) October 30, 2019
https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/1189641057279139841
https://twitter.com/sarafischer/status/1189637846069592067
This 👇 Algorithmic amplification and micro-targeting are game changers when it comes to political messaging — something @alexstamos and I talked about just the other day re: Facebook https://t.co/tpZbLCZD8V https://t.co/gwtjBzkIVf
— Mathew Ingram (@mathewi) October 30, 2019
Will Twitter address the algorithm, as the reach of the (unpaid) political speech, of which certain candidates seem to have mastered? https://t.co/04EAp0Lxas
— Josh Sternberg (@joshsternberg) October 30, 2019
https://twitter.com/panzer/status/1189638224873844736
1) Yes, good.
2) Twitter's political ad revenue is dinky.
3) This is obviously designed to knife Facebook when it's down. And the minute it releases earnings. https://t.co/Ts7Gy2yKll
— Shira Ovide (@ShiraOvide) October 30, 2019
https://twitter.com/panzer/status/1189639000715186176
This is spot on by focusing on velocity and reach of messaging. To be clear, candidates and organizations will still be able to communicate on the platforms. They just won’t be able to run targeted advertising to accelerate the velocity of the reach. As I read it. https://t.co/L4w3HQSZ9t
— Jason Kint (@jason_kint) October 30, 2019
Paid for, amplified, microtargeted speech is not free speech. It has nothing to do with ‘speech’. It is corporate profit extracted from a toxic abusive industry & it should be nowhere near our elections.
— Carole Cadwalladr (@carolecadwalla) October 30, 2019
https://twitter.com/nickconfessore/status/1189639614363045889
Cannot believe that Jack Dorsey and John Bolton are shaping up to be this season's heroes https://t.co/4scpxomI94
— Michelle Goldberg (@michelleinbklyn) October 30, 2019
https://twitter.com/laguarda/status/1189638147715620864
https://twitter.com/kt_so_it_goes/status/1189642113849405441
Twitter walking away from political ads has more than a whiff of @benthompson's "strategy credit":
"An uncomplicated decision that makes a company look good relative to other companies who face much more significant trade-offs "https://t.co/SirGvpw7ok
— Joshua Benton (@jbenton) October 30, 2019
Finally, someone who runs a social network realizes that limiting the ability for a rich person to saturate a space with one ideology is not "censorship."
The true censorship comes when important messages can't be heard on social media amidst a deluge of cash. https://t.co/IWJ8Ouyz7F
— Ben Collins (@oneunderscore__) October 30, 2019
https://twitter.com/kirstinestewart/status/1189654214248677376
