Advertising

The Federal Election Commission is asking for public input on its disclosure rules for online political advertisements, as companies like Facebook and Google are being scrutinized by investigators for ads they ran during the 2016 presidential campaign. The FEC announced that they would be reopening the public comment period on the rules nearly a year after the last time they sought public input on the disclosure requirement.

“In light of developments since the close of the last comment period, the Commission is reopening the comment period once again to consider disclaimer requirements as applied to certain internet communications,” the announcement reads. The move comes as some lawmakers are pressing for tighter disclosure requirements in the wake of Facebook’s revelation that it had uncovered 3,000 political ads purchased by Russian actors. During the 2012 election cycle, Facebook and Google had both received exemptions from the FEC’s rules requiring that political ads feature a disclosure indicating who paid for them.

Amazon is making a serious effort to break into the digital advertising business, an arena dominated by its fellow behemoth competitors, Google and Facebook. The company is opening a new office in New York City, which it says will bring more than 2,000 jobs. The new space will also bring it closer to New York’s advertising agencies. Media agency executives have already said that they have been increasingly contacted by Amazon representatives trying to sell them and their clients ad space. Amazon has already begun to beef up its ad sales team and enhance its programmatic advertising business.

Google for the first time has uncovered evidence that Russian operatives exploited the company’s platforms in an attempt to interfere in the 2016 election, apparently.

The Silicon Valley giant has found that tens of thousands of dollars were spent on ads by Russian agents who aimed to spread disinformation across Google’s many products, which include YouTube, as well as advertising associated with Google search, Gmail, and the company’s DoubleClick ad network. Google runs the world’s largest online advertising business, and YouTube is the world’s largest online video site. The discovery by Google is also significant because the ads do not appear to be from the same Kremlin-affiliated troll farm that bought ads on Facebook -- a sign that the Russian effort to spread disinformation online may be a much broader problem than Silicon Valley companies have unearthed so far.

The Trump presidential campaign spent most of its digital advertising budget on Facebook, testing more than 50,000 ad variations each day in an attempt to micro-target voters, President Donald Trump’s digital director, Brad Parscale, told CBS’s 60 Minutes in an interview scheduled to air Oct 8. “Twitter is how [Trump] talked to the people, Facebook was going to be how he won,” Parscale said. Facebook provided Trump 2016 with employees who embedded in the campaign’s digital office and helped educate staffers on how to use Facebook ads, he said. Because he “wanted people who supported Donald Trump”, Parscale said, the Facebook employees were questioned on their political views. “Campaigns aren’t able to hand-pick Facebook team members to work on their projects,” the statement read, in apparent reference to Parscale’s claim, as reported by CBS, that the Facebook employees that served as “embeds” in his office “had to be partisan and he questioned them to make sure”. Parscale said the Trump campaign used Facebook to reach clusters of rural voters, such as “15 people in the Florida Panhandle that I would never buy a TV commercial for”. “I started making ads that showed the bridge crumbling,” he said. “I can find the 1,500 people in one town that care about infrastructure. Now, that might be a voter that normally votes Democrat.”

Sen Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) said that she is working on legislation that would mandate online political advertisements be subject to the same rules as broadcast advertisements. “And the rules that apply for ads when they’re put on TV or radio, where you have to register them and say how much you paid, that doesn’t apply to these online ads. And so our laws need to catch up with what’s going on with our campaigns,” Sen Klobuchar said. The effort comes amid the growing controversy over Facebook’s political advertising during the 2016 election. The social media company admitted last month that Russians possibly tied to the Kremlin purchased ads on the platform during the presidential race.

Facebook is going to require advertisements that are targeted to people based on "politics, religion, ethnicity or social issues" to be manually reviewed before they go live, according to an e-mail sent to advertisers. That's a higher standard than that required of most Facebook ads, which are bought and uploaded to the site through an automated system. It's also warning that it expects the new policy to slow down the launch of new ad campaigns.

The steps Facebook is taking to combat questions of Russian election interference strike at the core of the company's business. The ad buyers who spent $450 million on Facebook ads love the platform's speed and efficiency — something they fear will be diminished by inserting more human oversight of political ads before they go live. The company's action comes as a political ad disclosure bill gains momentum on Capitol Hill.

Facebook cut references to Russia from a public report in April about manipulation of its platform around the presidential election because of concerns among the company’s lawyers and members of its policy team, apparently. The drafting of the report sparked internal debate over how much information to disclose about Russian mischief on Facebook and its efforts to affect U.S. public opinion during the 2016 presidential contest.

Some at Facebook pushed to not include a mention of Russia in the report because the company’s understanding of Russian activity was too speculative, apparently. Ultimately, the 13-page report, published on April 27 and titled “Information Operations and Facebook,” was shortened by several pages by Facebook’s legal and policy teams from an earlier draft, and didn’t mention Russia at all. Rather, it concluded that “malicious actors” engaged in influence campaigns during the U.S. presidential election but said it couldn’t determine who was responsible. The extent of Facebook’s understanding at the time of Russian influence is unclear. It wasn’t until a Sept. 6 Facebook newsroom blog post that the company publicly identified Russia as a source of such efforts.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain (R-AZ) said the panel will work to combat Russia's disinformation campaign that aims to undermine democratic governments and sow division and dissent throughout the United States. “We know that Putin’s Russia has not slowed its efforts to interfere in our elections and domestic affairs. The Senate Armed Services Committee will continue working to address this challenge, which is a threat to our national security,” Sen McCain said. Sen McCain said he is a victim of one of Russia's targeted ads, which planted a false narrative that he met with a leader from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

Reps Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ) and Emanual Cleaver (D-MO), two black lawmakers, sharply rebuked Twitter this week for serving as “an avenue to spread racism and bigotry” — and threatened regulation if the tech industry as a whole doesn’t identify and suspend the accounts behind those messages. The calls for action came in a letter to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey sent on Oct 3.

For them, the tipping point appears to be reports that Russian agents sought to stir political unrest ahead of the 2016 presidential election by stoking racial tensions, even running ads targeting groups like Black Lives Matter. “As a result of the far-reaching nature of Twitter’s technology, we have seen an effort to undermine our democracy, create or fan flames of racial divisions, and spread hate speech that can ultimately cumulate into violence,” the two Democratic lawmakers wrote. “We are disturbed by the ease in which foreign actors were able to manipulate your platform to advance anti-American sentiments that both exacerbates racial tension and ultimately threatens our democracy,” they continued. “More importantly, we are disappointed by the silence from you and others in your industry on ways to counter such blatant manipulation of this medium to build racial animosity, the consequences of which are quite literally life threatening.”

In June, an Apple security engineer wrote a blog post that sent the bustling, $83 billion digital ad industry reeling. In it, he described a new feature, recently rolled out in the latest version of Apple’s Safari web browser, to limit so-called cross-site tracking, where advertising networks and other services can monitor behavior from site to site. The feature, called Intelligent Tracking Prevention (ITP), uses machine learning to spot trackers in the act and limit their reach. The feature quickly won praise from privacy advocates–the Electronic Frontier Foundation called Apple’s move “an important step to protect your privacy.” The online advertising sector has not been as supportive.

In a letter published in Sept, a group of industry groups slammed the software rollout as harmful to ad-supported sites and consumers alike. They argue that Apple’s move substitutes the company’s standards for industrywide conventions around cookies, the digital files used to record user behavior and settings online, and will lead to consumers seeing less relevant and useful ads. Safari, the letter said, “breaks those standards and replaces them with an amorphous set of shifting rules that will hurt the user experience and sabotage the economic model for the internet.”