San Francisco Chronicle

Facebook said to consider banning political ads

- By Mike Isaac Mike Isaac is a New York Times writer.

Facebook is considerin­g banning political advertisin­g across its network before the November general election, according to two people with knowledge of the discussion­s, after facing intense pressure for allowing hate speech and misinforma­tion to flourish across its site.

The decision has not been finalized, said the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussion­s were confidenti­al, and the company could continue with its current political advertisin­g policy. Discussion­s on potentiall­y banning political ads have simmered since late last year, they said, and the idea gained traction in recent weeks as Facebook has faced more scrutiny over its content.

A Facebook spokesman declined to comment. Bloomberg News earlier reported the potential change in policy.

If a ban on political ads were to happen, it would be a reversal for the Menlo Park company and CEO Mark Zuckerberg. The social network has long allowed politician­s and political parties to run ads across its network virtually unchecked, even if those ads contained falsehoods or other misinforma­tion. Zuckerberg has repeatedly said he would not police politician­s’ ads and stated that the company was not an arbiter of truth.

Zuckerberg has said he believes in free speech. He has also said that removing political ads from the network could harm downballot candidates who are less wellfunded than nationally prominent politician­s. Political advertisin­g makes up a negligible amount of Facebook’s revenue, he has said, so any decision would not be based on financial considerat­ions.

But that handsoff approach has led to an intense backlash against the social network. Lawmakers, civil rights groups and Facebook’s own employees have assailed it for letting hate speech and misinforma­tion fester on its site. Last month, the Biden presidenti­al campaign said it would begin urging its supporters to demand that Facebook strengthen its rules against misinforma­tion. More recently, advertiser­s such as Unilever and CocaCola have paused their advertisin­g on the service in protest.

That was punctuated this week by the release of a twoyear audit of Facebook’s policies. The audit, conducted by civil rights experts and lawyers who were handpicked by the company, concluded that Facebook had not done enough to protect people on the platform from discrimina­tory posts and ads. In particular, they said, Facebook had been too willing to let politician­s run amok.

“Elevating free expression is a good thing, but it should apply to everyone,” they wrote. “When it means that powerful politician­s do not have to abide by the same rules that everyone else does, a hierarchy of speech is created that privileges certain voices over less powerful voices.”

Zuckerberg has stuck to his free speech position even as other social media companies have recently taken more action against hate speech and inaccurate posts by politician­s and their supporters. Twitter has started labeling some of President Trump’s tweets as untruthful or glorifying violence, while Snap has said it would stop promoting his account on Snapchat because his speech could lead to violence.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States