Sources: Facebook is considering imposing a ban on political ads on its network in the days leading up to the US election in November

Facebook Inc. is considering imposing a ban on political ads on its social network in the days leading up to the U.S. election in November …

Bloomberg 2020-07-11

Context & Ripple Effects

In July, sources told Bloomberg that Facebook was weighing a pre-election political ad blackout — an idea floated two months out from voting day. By early September the company had acted on it, announcing it would stop accepting new political ads a full week before the US presidential election as part of its anti-interference measures.

The decision immediately drew pushback on both flanks: Slate argued the freeze would suppress legitimate campaign response to late-breaking news, while ProPublica found it also binds election officials who rely on Facebook to tell voters how to cast ballots. The arc then closed after polling day, when Facebook confirmed campaigns could resume ads on November 4 — opening the window for victory-claim ads before all votes were counted.

First-order effects

Campaigns lose their paid channel for the final week of the race, unable to buy reach on Facebook to counter late developments or drive turnout in the closing days.
State and local election offices are caught in the same ban, cutting off one of their main tools for communicating voting logistics to the public right when confusion is most costly.

Second-order effects

Criticism splits into two fronts Facebook must answer at once — civil-liberties objections that the pause chills speech, and procedural ones that it leaves election authorities without paid outreach — forcing the company to defend a single rule against opposite complaints.
Allowing ads again on November 4, while ballots are still being counted, creates a paid channel for premature victory claims, shifting pressure onto Facebook's post-election moderation rather than eliminating the risk the ban targeted.

Third-order effects

Facebook is functioning as de facto election infrastructure: a private content-policy calendar now shapes when candidates and officials can speak at scale, with no public process behind either the blackout or its lifting.
If each cycle produces a new ad-hoc rule set announced weeks before voting, platform election policy hardens into an annual negotiation between social networks and political actors, with regulators watching from the sidelines.

The trend: Major social platforms are unilaterally rewriting the timing rules of political advertising around US elections, turning content-policy decisions into quasi-regulatory acts over the electoral process.

Discussion

@kurtwagner8 Kurt Wagner on x
NEW: Facebook is considering a ban on political ads on its social network in the days leading up to the U.S. election in November. No decision yet, but it's being discussed, according to sources
@kurtwagner8 Kurt Wagner on x
Full story: Facebook is considering a ban on political ads in the days leading up to November's election. Could help cut down on the spread of misinfo, especially since FB doesn't fact-check political ads from candidates/campaigns https://www.bloomberg.com/...
@alexstamos Alex Stamos on x
I'll say the same thing I did when Twitter made this move: 1) Political ads are a tiny part of FB's revenue and a huge PITA 2) Eliminating online political ads only benefits those with money, incumbency or the ability to get media coverage. Who does that sound like? https://twitt…
@rob_flaherty Rob Flaherty on x
To put a fine point on this: Under this proposal the President could use organic posts to suppress voting by mail (as he did today), but Democrats could not run ads encouraging people to return their mail ballots. https://twitter.com/...
@rabois Keith Rabois on x
Folly. And protects incumbents but I reocgnize the desire to avoid the headache for non material revenue. https://twitter.com/...
@profgalloway Scott Galloway on x
The argument from the head butcher is this: People should be free to eat rotten hamburger, even if it wreaks havoc on their gastrointestinal tract, & the seller of the meat should not be the one to tell them which meat is good and which is bad @karaswisher https://www.nytimes.com…
@waltmossberg Walt Mossberg on x
“Mr. Zuckerberg is serving up a rancid meal that he says he's not comfortable cooking himself, even as his hands control every aspect of the operation.” Must-read truth-telling about Zuckerberg and Sandberg⁩ by ⁦@karaswisher⁩. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@nytimesbusiness @nytimesbusiness on x
With the November election looming and as Facebook grapples with intensifying scrutiny over content posted to its platform, the core of a debate within the social media company is whether banning political ads would help or harm. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@digiphile Alex Howard on x
I agree with Alex on both of these counts: https://galley.cjr.org/... @facebook could limit targeting like @google did, but geotargeting across media types & platforms looks like a smart way forward to me. https://twitter.com/...
@borzou Borzou Daragahi on x
“Zuckerberg is serving up a rancid meal he says he's not cooking himself, even as his hands control every aspect. I say to him and every executive at Facebook: You cannot hold on to such enormous power and avoid responsibility when things get tough.” https://www.nytimes.com/...
@juddlegum Judd Legum on x
This is a bad idea but it does show Facebook is beginning to understand the implications of giving politicians the green light to lie in paid ads The weeks leading up to the election are going to be a catastrophe https://twitter.com/...
@nytopinion @nytopinion on x
Think about Facebook as a seller of meat products. Some of its just fine, but much of it is tainted. The company knows some meat is bad, and there's no regulatory oversight, writes @karaswisher. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@sentedcruz Senator Ted Cruz on x
This would be a mistake. Banning political ads would: ✅Silence the free speech of candidates, groups, & Americans ✅Give the corrupt & biased Mainstream Media a monopoly ✅Empower Silicon Valley billionaires & their biased censorship practices https://www.bloomberg.com/...
@brendancarrfcc Brendan Carr on x
Less speech means more power for established gatekeepers. https://twitter.com/...
@jason_kint Jason Kint on x
Based on what? Yes a lot of grassroot campaigns come from progressives and yes there are massive data harvesting conpanies on that side, too. Both sides need to come to grips with the harms of microtargeting + political advertising and accept the ban until real solutions. https:/…
@ruskin147 Rory Cellan-Jones on x
This would be an extraordinary u-turn but sounds quite likely https://twitter.com/...
@rosenbergerlm Laura Rosenberger on x
While I've called for @Facebook to halt political ads until there are effective regulations for online ads, changing its tune this close to the election is also problematic. This is the kind of thing they should have done long ago - doing so now may just create more chaos. https:…
@karaswisher Kara Swisher on x
This is akin to using a nuclear bomb to oust rodents and hurts the less well known pols and orgs: Facebook Considers Banning Political Ads Before US 2020 Election - Bloomberg https://www.bloomberg.com/...
@rashadrobinson Rashad Robinson on x
.@Facebook claims to care about free expression but would rather restrict political speech altogether than take responsibility for curbing hate speech, voter suppression and disinformation. We have had clear demands for years. It's time to meet them. https://www.bloomberg.com/...
@kentremendous Ken Tremendous on x
Instead of stopping people from lying, they're just gonna stop all people from talking. https://twitter.com/...
@jesselehrich Jesse Lehrich on x
if Facebook wants to curb the spread of misinfo, they should... implement & enforce thoughtful policies designed to curb the spread of misinfo. why, there are plenty of them in this excellent civil rights audit they commissioned: https://about.fb.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@juliacarriew Julia Carrie Wong on x
Interesting. Early voting starts 46 days before the election in some states so, uhhhh, that might be relevant. https://twitter.com/...
@hkreid Heather Reid on x
Just to be clear: This is a cop-out by @Facebook to avoid dealing with the very real problem of disinformation in their organic content. This will hurt legitimate efforts to get out *correct* voting information to the people who need it. https://twitter.com/...
@kevinroose Kevin Roose on x
Hypothetically, if you wanted to be ~ excluded from the narrative ~ about the 2020 election without changing the core mechanics of your platform or wading into thorny politicized issues around organic distribution, this is probably what you'd do! https://www.nytimes.com/...
@sarahfrier Sarah Frier on x
Facebook's former security head implies this move would benefit Trump https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@rvawonk Caroline Orr on x
NEW: Facebook is reportedly considering imposing a ban on political ads in the days leading up to the U.S. election in November. This could limit some mis/disinformation, but at this point, it's also just as likely to ruin last-minute GOTV efforts. https://www.bloomberg.com/...
@daveleeft Dave Lee on x
FB should repurpose them, reinventing the British party political broadcast rules for the internet era. https://twitter.com/...
@jason_kint Jason Kint on x
They should have done it a long time ago - not just possibly weeks ahead of election. Twitter and Google announced last year after three years of pressure. Here is FB getting shredded on their logic. Now off to watch panel on this exact topic! https://twitter.com/... https://twit…
@profgalloway Scott Galloway on x
Facebook considers having a conscience https://www.nytimes.com/...
@pkafka Peter Kafka on x
This has been in the mix for a while, and folks were surprised the company didn't embrace it earlier, since it is already done in Europe. But, for the record, when I asked FB ad boss Carolyn Everson about it onstage at Code Media last November, she said no way. https://twitter.co…
@mikeisaac Rat King on x
More Friday News! Facebook considers banning political ads from its network after months of punishing pushback Would be a huge about-face after Zuckerberg staunchly defended the position since late last year https://www.nytimes.com/...
@mhbergen Mark Bergen on x
Early congrats to the public sector advertising sales team at Google. https://www.bloomberg.com/...
@kurtwagner8 Kurt Wagner on x
Pros: Could cut down on *some* misinfo in the final days/hours before the election Cons: Would pose a real challenge to “get out the vote” campaigns, as well as limit candidate reach if they are responding to breaking news/new information
@margimurphy Margi Murphy on x
I'm hearing that Google Adsense is seeing a lot of YouTube creators/brands requesting that their videos don't show political ads, so seems they are becoming increasingly difficult to display https://twitter.com/...
@just_jenna Jenna Lowenstein on x
1. The ads are not* the problem! 2. This would dramatically hamstring campaigns' ability to communicate and fundraise in the home stretch. https://www.bloomberg.com/... *or at least are a tiny crumb of the problem compared with mountains of organic misinfo
@emmakinery Emma Kinery on x
Facebook doesn't fact-check ads from politicians or campaigns, a point of contention for many who say the policy means ads on the platform could be used to spread misinformation The potential ban is still only being discussed and hasn't yet been finalized https://www.bloomberg.co…
@markdistef Mark Di Stefano on x
This really shouldn't be controversial considering other countries (UK, Australia) have blackouts in place for TV/radio heading into the election. https://twitter.com/...
@tonyromm Tony Romm on x
some interesting context, for those curious: Facebook actually considered a similar thing — folks told us it could be akin to a 72-hr pre-election blackout — back in December when FB was under heat for Trump's ads. https://twitter.com/...
@kylebrussell Kyle Russell on x
Imagine the things people will put out to try to make up for it with organic engagement https://twitter.com/...
@sarahfrier Sarah Frier on x
This would be easier than finding all the misleading ads/voter suppression in time for it to matter https://twitter.com/...
@ttagaris Tim Tagaris on x
The problem is not the ads... it's the disinformation. x1000 This decision would disproportionately impact progressive, inurgent campaigns. But maybe that is the point. https://twitter.com/...
@mccarthyryanj Ryan McCarthy on x
Non-partisan organizations, voting groups and even many states themselves are spending many millions of dollars in Facebook ads to get out the vote this year. Facebook banning ads this late in the game could really backfire: https://www.bloomberg.com/...
@menakadoshi Menaka Doshi on x
How will it tell an ad from a pretend non-ad? https://twitter.com/...
@caseynewton Casey Newton on x
Big if true, as they say https://twitter.com/...
@carolmassar Carol Massar on x
Whoa *FACEBOOK CONSIDERS POLITICAL-AD BLACKOUT AHEAD OF U.S. ELECTION

Chronicles