Facebook: everyone should block political ads

Facebook is now giving its users the option to opt out of all political advertising, in the hopes of calming the heated debate over its often-considered too lax approach in terms of moderating the words of election candidates.

• Read also: Facebook sets a target of 4 million US voter registrations

The option is deployed from Wednesday in the United States, 5 months before the presidential election. It will be extended to other countries on the most popular network in the world as well as on the Instagram app.

It allows you to block all ads paid for by candidates or political groups.

Facebook, Twitter, YouTube (Google) and their competitors are engaged in a schizophrenic fight at times against disinformation, since they must at the same time ensure freedom of expression and remain open to political debates.

After the debacle of 2016, an election year marked by vast operations of manipulation of voters via the networks, the platforms took measures, such as fact-checking programs.

This fall, Twitter has simply banned political ads, and allows itself to intervene in the event of a violation of its rules, even if it is to sanction heads of state, such as Jair Bolsonaro or Donald Trump. .

Facebook, for its part, authorizes this type of ad and refuses to subject the comments of political figures to fact-checking (their messages remain subject to general rules against terrorism, the praise of violence or even false practical information on the polls).

Warm welcome

A bias that angered some, including the Democratic candidate for the White House, Joe Biden, who accused the American president of rampant disinformation.

“Everyone wants politicians to be held accountable for what they say, and I know many people would like us to moderate and take away more of their content,” Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg admitted in a letter. open published Tuesday evening on USA Today.

“But we can only hold them to account if we see what the candidates are saying, even if we viscerally hate what they have to say,” he continued, in his usual public interest argument. to get informed.

The new option did not arouse the enthusiasm of observers.

Adam Chiara, a specialist in social networks and politics, essentially sees it as a public relations operation which “does nothing to help rid the platform of toxic comments”.

“I would be curious to know how many people will activate the option,” notes this professor at the University of Hartford.

“A lot of users don’t even change their default privacy settings, so how many will bother doing that? “

“Relocated” moderation

Facebook is “outsourcing” content moderation to its users, said Shannon McGregor, a professor of political communication at the University of North Carolina.

The option also risks “reinforcing the advantage of outgoing candidates,” she added, as some ads allow candidates less covered by the media to become known to voters.

“In the end, I think the best way to make politicians accountable is through voting,” said Mark Zuckerberg.

He set his network the goal of helping put four million more Americans on the electoral roll for the presidential election in November and launched “the largest voter information campaign in American history.”

“Facebook has a responsibility not only to prevent people from being deprived of the right to vote – a problem that disproportionately affects people of color – but also to actively support voter registration and mobilization well informed, “he added.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *