Facebook’s election woes are headed to Georgia

All four Georgia Senate candidates are upset they can’t run political ads on Facebook. | Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images

An extended pause on political ads could complicate the Senate runoffs.

Less than a week after Joe ***** secured a victory in the 2020 presidential election, it looks like Facebook’s post-election plan is already backfiring.

On Wednesday, the company announced it would extend its ban on political ads for at least another month, and possibly longer, in an attempt to quell confusion over an election that President Donald ***** lost but still hasn’t conceded. Google similarly told advertisers it was unlikely to lift its political ad ban in November or December, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Since the 2016 election, Facebook has sought to avoid intense and continued criticism over its policies on political ads. Now, as the latest presidential election season is drawn out by an extra couple of months due to the dual runoff in Georgia that will decide control of the Senate, some claim the political ad ban’s extension constitutes voter suppression.

The frustration with Facebook’s handling of the election extends well beyond its political ad policy. Democrats and others have condemned the social media platform for enabling viral misinformation. The ***** campaign, in particular, has criticized Facebook’s approach, which often involves applying mealy-mouthed labels to content rather than removing posts that push conspiracy theories about voter fraud and sow doubt in the election. At the same time, Republicans complain that Facebook is systematically biased against conservatives and that tech companies unfairly censor right-wing voices. (These complaints usually lack evidence.)

The week after the election, Facebook seemed to respond to the litany of criticism in a blog post. The company wrote that, despite conservatives frequently dominating the lists of the most-engaged content on its platform, most of what people see on Facebook is not hyperpartisan political content.

Both sides are upset about how the platform treats organic content, but they’re also anxious about maintaining their ability to advertise on Facebook — a way to more directly spread their messaging on the site. So as the presidential election begins to appear in our rearview mirror and the Georgia runoff approaches, the problem of Facebook being bad for democracy — one that Facebook itself has admitted to — isn’t going away.

The Georgia runoff has both parties mad at Facebook — again

In Georgia, Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock are challenging Republican incumbents Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, respectively, in separate races in January.

Because Facebook and Google are not allowing any political ads to run on their platforms, which is an extension of previous policies, the candidates haven’t been able to use the two highly valued digital platforms to reach voters with advertisements or supply them with information about Georgia’s somewhat unusual runoff-election process. This, of course, is happening in the midst of a pandemic, when in-person campaign activities are limited.

While Google has not revealed much about its plan to extend the political ad ban, Facebook’s director of product management, Rob Leathern, took to Twitter on Wednesday to offer more details about his company’s decision.

Critics quickly pointed out that Facebook, which is worth hundreds of billions of dollars, has had years and a seemingly endless supply of resources to build such an ability.

Neither Facebook nor Google responded to a request for comment.

The extension of the ad ban has left the Georgia Senate candidates to question how Facebook — and to a lesser extent Google — will continue to impact the election. The Democratic Georgia Senate campaigns have accused Facebook of allowing its algorithms to boost misinformation and hyperpartisan, right-wing accounts.

Miryam Lipper, of the Ossoff campaign, told Recode in a statement that the companies were “are putting their fingers on the scale for millionaire Republican candidates” and “ignoring the rampant disinformation on their platforms.” Terrence Clark, of Reverend Raphael Warnock’s campaign, said the platforms were “preventing campaigns from sharing crucial information about how to register to vote, sign up for an absentee ballot and how to ensure their vote counts amounts to voter suppression.”

Meanwhile, Republicans have resorted to accusing the social network of anti-conservative bias, which has become the party’s signature talking point on tech companies. Loeffler accused the companies of “silencing conservatives” and “suppressing free speech,” in a Thursday tweet. Perdue’s campaign spokesperson told Recode the bans consisted “an infringement of basic First Amendment rights.”

Republicans and Democrats have dueling complaints about Facebook

While their particular grievances may be different, politicians from both parties have been increasingly vocal about their frustrations with Facebook since the 2016 election. Things heated up especially in the weeks before November 3.

For example, conservative fumed after the platform limited the distribution of a New York Post story about Hunter *****. The outrage ultimately spurred a Senate hearing in which Republicans pushed their claim that Facebook, among other companies, were tampering with the election. Members of both parties were also angered, when Facebook inadvertently blocked a slew of campaign advertisements from going up days before the election.

Of course, the frustration over Facebook’s ad policies reflect both sides’ broader frustrations with its handling of organic content. Democrats seem like they’re only growing more upset about rampant misinformation on the platform in the days after the election. Bill Russo, a ***** spokesperson, recently accused the company of “shredding the fabric of our democracy” in series of tweets lambasting Facebook’s failure to clamp down on content that promoted *****’s false accusations of widespread voter fraud and claims of victory.

At the same time, conservatives, including the Georgia Republican Senate candidates, have continued to argue that Facebook is censoring them. And there are other Republican frustrations with Facebook over its voter registration efforts. *****’s digital director once argued, without evidence, that Facebook’s attempt to register more voters was a ploy to register more ***** than ***** voters. Some Republican secretaries of state even wrote to the company objecting to its Voter Information Center, an online platform for helping people register to vote, discouraging the effort and arguing it was redundant.

With what’s happening with Georgia, it seems clear that neither side will let up in their criticism of Facebook. At the same time, this latest episode is a reminder that companies like Facebook and Google have by no means perfected their policies toward US elections, and that political content, from misinformation to candidate advertisements to hyperpartisan Facebook pages, do not exist in a vacuum.

In this most recent case, the move to extend a ban on political ads might have a technical explanation. But for the candidates in Georgia, it has a real impact on their campaign plans.

Facebook’s policies with one state’s runoff election could influence which party controls the Senate — and whether Joe ***** can push through a ledger of Democratic policies without hurdles from Republicans. It’s a reminder that the company’s influence over politics only seems to be growing.

Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network. All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists.

via Vox – Recode

Check out the Finding Your Identity Podcast!