Posted on 09/08/2017 8:06:46 AM PDT by ptsal
Facebook, which acknowledged this week that it sold $100,000 worth of political ads in the last two years to accounts linked to a Russian troll factory, came under stinging criticism Thursday over its refusal to release copies of the ads to the public — or to congressional investigators.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
$100,000? Wow!
How do you define a political ad? Here on FR, I suppose you could call all our rhetoric “political ads”.
Abandon Fecebook
The wealth you provide with every log in is being used to advocate for illegal aliens.
The Ads were probably promoting the CPUSA endorsement of H->! .
Finally found the Russian payoff connection to the U.S. elections; Facebook.
(One might wonder what Facebook is hiding by not turning over the ads. Facebook seems to have no problem turning over user data.)
Leni
As much as I hate FB and Suckerberg, I’ll have to side with them on this issue.
When the government can start making demands ob purveyors of political advertising, it’s a real slippery slope to censorship of political speech..................
So if someone in a foreign country (like Russia) says "We Like Trump"....there's some kind of crime?
$100,000 isn’t very much, spread out over two years. It’s hard to see how that amount of money could have sustained any sort of ad campaign or propaganda effort that would have made much of a difference to anything. My Pillow probably spends that much in two days.
Who is Zuckerberg protecting?
None of us!
I’ll wager Facebook has taken in a lot more than $100K in foreign political advertising over the past two years, which might explain Zuckerburg’s reluctance to provide details.
But when they are censoring free speech then their whole defense is moot.
It’s a strange conundrum they find themselves in.
1. They hate Trump.
2. Revealing the Russian advertisers would hurt Trump (or so they think).
3. We make money from advertisers.
4. If we snitch then our ad revenue will take a hit.
5. What do we do?..................
That is making a huge assumption the ads were in favor of Trump. I would submit they were not and don’t want that to be exposed, therefor exposing their very real biases.
That’s a good point. The ads may be anti Trump as well.......................
You cannot persecute Mark Zuck! He thinks he is Jesus Christ, so he is protected under the 1st amendment.
Zuckster....President-in-Waiting
... or is it GrandPoobah-in-Wanting
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.