Sleazy Russian ads demand action from Silicon Valley

Facebook, Google and other social media companies have to get their political advertising house in order. The alternative is massive governmental intervention with the sort of restrictive regulations the tech industry loathes. The integrity of our democra

The evidence of Russian meddling in the 2016 election is overwhelming: A foreign power with interests counter to ours bought divisive political ads with the intent of spreading misinformation and influencing voters.

The question of collusion remains unresolved, but it’s irrelevant. The United States cannot tolerate any foreign intervention in our democratic process. This was a priority of the Founding Fathers, and it is ever more important today.

Online companies’ approach to political advertising has been the anythinggoes, Wild West freedom that tech likes to embrace. But accountability and transparency are critical to our democracy. If social media companies can’t guarantee the level of public disclosure that newspapers and television and radio stations routinely require for political advertising, Congress will have no choice but to act.

Until last month, Facebook insisted that information about buyers of all ads, including political ads, was confidential. After the 2016 election, CEO Mark Zuckerberg called the idea that misinformation on Facebook changed the outcome of the election “crazy.”

But now Zuckerberg, a potential 2020 presidential candidate, finds himself in the embarrassing position of retracting his bombast. On Monday he gave congressional investigators more than 3,000 ads likely linked to Russia.

Facebook also announced it will require disclosure of all buyers of political ads and will allow users to see the ads advertisers have on their political page.

That may not be enough for Sen. Mark Warner. The Virginia Democrat is working with Minnesota Democrat Sen. Amy Klobuchar on legislation requiring social media companies to keep a public file of who buys election ads and communications, what they paid, how many views were generated and other information.

But in this online world, what’s a political ad? The majority of the Russian ads appear to have fomented division on contentious social issues rather than backing or opposing a specific candidate. The tech industry and lawmakers need to develop a clear definition before legislation can be evaluated.

Facebook has not detailed how it will review the ads placed online. Most responsible newspapers and other publications, for example, review all political ads and reserve the right to reject those that they know include false information.

Facebook, Google and other social media companies should adopt the same standard. They can afford it. Google is expected to rake in $73.8 billion in net digital ad sales in 2017, and Facebook will take in an estimated $36.3 billion.

Social media companies have tremendous potential to do good, but the opposite is also true. They need to bring sunshine to political advertising, identifying sources and rejecting ads whose source is unclear.

Thomas Jefferson didn’t see this coming, but he saw the danger of letting foreigners meddle in our democracy. Full transparency is the remedy.