tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/political-advertising-1242/articlesPolitical advertising – The Conversation2024-03-14T05:54:48Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2257742024-03-14T05:54:48Z2024-03-14T05:54:48ZThe Jacqui Lambie Network is the latest victim of ‘cybersquatting’. It’s the tip of the iceberg of negative political ads online<p>Firebrand senator Jacqui Lambie is furious. Amid the Tasmanian election campaign (in which she’s running candidates), her party, the Jacqui Lambie Network, has fallen victim to one of the many pitfalls in the world of online political advertising.</p>
<p>Her party’s website is lambienetwork.com.au. You might understand her anger, then, after <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-14/jacqui-lambie-slams-liberals-over-website/103581992">finding out</a> the Tasmanian Liberal party created a website to campaign against her, called lambienetwork.com. It’s a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it difference.</p>
<p>This is a textbook example of what’s known as cybersquatting. It’s when internet domain names that are similar to existing trademarked material or the names of people or organisations are bought up by competitors to use against the original. In fact, the major parties have purchased <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/2022/04/08/crikeys-australian-political-party-domain-register/">a heap</a> of domain names.</p>
<p>As political parties desperately battle for voters’ attention in a world full of distractions and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-08/trust-slump-as-division-rules/101939406">dwindling trust in government</a>, cybersquatting is one of many online tools in the toolkit. But the toolkit is full of blunt instruments that may only be effective on a minority of people. The true damage is being done to the majority, who have less and less faith in politics and its institutions.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/all-governments-are-guilty-of-running-political-ads-on-the-public-purse-heres-how-to-stop-it-191766">All governments are guilty of running political ads on the public purse. Here's how to stop it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A crowded, manufactured landscape</h2>
<p>In commercial marketing, there’s a focus on long-term brand building. In political marketing, there’s just one goal: winning.</p>
<p>With such high pressure, and little time to hit objectives, parties and candidates use highly emotive messaging and narratives to drive rapid attention and engagement, and hopefully convince people to vote for them.</p>
<p>With markets splintered into ever-smaller segments, based at times on very specific needs, <a href="https://theconversation.com/facebook-videos-targeted-texts-and-clive-palmer-memes-how-digital-advertising-is-shaping-this-election-campaign-115629">social media</a> has helped move voters quickly and developed narratives around leaders’ personal brands. </p>
<p>Instagram was used successfully by former prime minister Scott Morrison with <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/language/punjabi/en/article/prime-minister-scott-morrison-makes-scomosas-says-would-have-liked-to-share-them-with-narendra-modi/fzx9zmmkg">his Scomosas</a> and attempt at Bunnings DIY. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1266952463464071171"}"></div></p>
<p>His successor, Anthony Albanese, has replicated that strategy, letting us get a glimpse of who he really is, even having a <a href="https://twitter.com/TotoAlbanese?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1529271741683339264%7Ctwgr%5E2db6b443e67a568315e7a33f81e6cd31f916b63d%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.perthnow.com.au%2Fpolitics%2Fanthony-albanese%2Fanthony-albaneses-dog-toto-gains-huge-following-on-twitter-c-6934822">Twitter/X account for his dog Toto</a>. This is aimed at developing resonance and building up likeability for his brand. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1531395641582047232"}"></div></p>
<p>Of course, as any royal watcher or user of social media can tell you, <a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-kate-middletons-photo-was-doctored-but-so-are-a-lot-of-images-we-see-today-225553">curated images are exactly that</a>: manufactured, for us. So we are trusting this method less and less. This will only get worse the longer voters are exposed to it.</p>
<p>Stories such as that in the 2022 federal election of Labor-aligned groups <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-08/aec-investigating-union-tiktok-accounts-ahead-of-election/100969896">considering paying influencers</a> to post friendly content, doesn’t help either. </p>
<p>As a result, when we see content posted by an influencer, we’re now more likely to be sceptical. Do they really like this product, or are they just being paid to say they do?</p>
<h2>‘Angertainment’ is highly effective</h2>
<p>So it’s back to square one. Enter negativity, or “angertainment”.</p>
<p>Reality shows are full of it. One example is <a href="https://www.girlmuseum.org/media-analysis-the-villain-edit/#:%7E:text=When%20a%20participant%20is%20edited%20in%20a%20way,footage%20of%20someone%20is%20presented%20to%20the%20audience.">the villain edit</a>, where certain contestants are framed to be the antagonist for the sake of drama. There’s also the cued music to make us feel this is the “season-defining moment”. </p>
<p>They do this for the same reasons politicians have done it for decades. It works. It gets our attention. We get engaged. We change our vote. Ratings of these shows don’t lie. </p>
<p>In the past, this was called “wedge politics”, as it wedged one group of voters against others. A party or candidate could then become that group’s champion, and hello election victory. Simple narrative construction. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-tracked-election-ad-spending-for-4-000-facebook-pages-heres-what-theyre-posting-about-and-why-cybersecurity-is-the-bigger-concern-182286">We tracked election ad spending for 4,000 Facebook pages. Here's what they're posting about – and why cybersecurity is the bigger concern</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This was easy when competition for our attention was less fierce. John Howard’s 2001 election-opening “<a href="https://theconversation.com/issues-that-swung-elections-tampa-and-the-national-security-election-of-2001-115143">we decide</a>” statement about immigration was pure wedge politics. </p>
<p>The aim is still the same now, but in a competitive environment for our attention and retention, modern methods have allowed for new ways to reach the average voter. Having not seen them before, people are <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-scare-campaigns-like-mediscare-work-even-if-voters-hate-them-62279">more susceptible to believing</a> them. </p>
<p>Clive Palmer has used <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/sep/08/clive-palmer-and-craig-kelly-using-spam-text-messages-to-capture-rightwing-vote-ahead-of-election-expert-says">spam text messages</a> over the years to grab some attention, although it hasn’t necessarily translated into electoral success.</p>
<p>A more inventive use of the internet to campaign was Pauline Hanson’s <a href="https://www.onenation.org.au/please-explain">cartoon series</a>. The first three episodes racked up <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/culture/tv-and-radio/pauline-hanson-as-a-superhero-these-cartoons-could-be-the-future-20211123-p59b9u.html">750,000 views</a> in two weeks on YouTube. </p>
<p>Both Labor and Liberal have had a strong presence on Snapchat. In 2016, the Liberals were among the first to <a href="https://www.marketingmag.com.au/social-digital/liberal-party-makes-world-history-first-sponsored-snapchat-lens-political-advertising/">make a filter</a> on the app. Labor was the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/technology/how-are-politicians-using-social-media-to-campaign-20220418-p5ae6q.html">only major party</a> to use it during the 2022 federal election campaign.</p>
<p>These are all new ways of communicating a party’s key messages, including scare or smear campaigns. </p>
<p>Think “Mediscare”, so well done by Labor in 2016 via SMS, and then the revenge sequel of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/08/it-felt-like-a-big-tide-how-the-death-tax-lie-infected-australias-election-campaign">death taxes</a> in 2019 by the Coalition. They used Facebook groups very well. </p>
<p>Angertainment is now seen as being more likely to get the message across, and thereby victory, than anything else. </p>
<p>A significant aspect of these campaigns was disinformation, including the misrepresentation or impersonation of candidates. Senator David Pocock was a key target in the ACT in 2022, but <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-27/david-pocock-lodges-complaint-over-advance-australia-corflutes/101016990">successfully ran a challenge</a> through the Australian Electoral Commission. </p>
<p>But this is 2024, and two years is an aeon in social media. The Jacqui Lambie Network (JLN) website trick we saw this week is an old-school one. Unlike some of the other strategies, it’s not effective. It is, however, childish. </p>
<p>So why bother? The attacking party would be obvious to most, if not by the authorised name as required by electoral laws. This dilutes the effect and it likely reinforces the reasons to vote for the JLN. </p>
<p>But political parties do it to capitalise on those who don’t realise they’re receiving a message in bad faith. Even if it’s a minority, it’s someone. In a tight political climate, it might be enough to tip the scales in their favour.</p>
<p>The collateral damage, of course, is the spread of misinformation and public disillusionment with politics and elections.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/few-restrictions-no-spending-limit-and-almost-no-oversight-welcome-to-political-advertising-in-australia-181248">Few restrictions, no spending limit, and almost no oversight: welcome to political advertising in Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Can we stop this?</h2>
<p>We can, easily. </p>
<p>Cybersquatting is in a grey area legally. There are gaps in the relevant legislation that make it very difficult for those affected to get websites taken down. They’re often managed by international organisations with laborious processes.</p>
<p>But the government can ban cyber hijacking or squatting of politicians or parties’ web addresses or social channels. It can restrict negative advertising, and bring in green ticks to verify truthful advertising. </p>
<p>Government can also ensure social media companies take more responsibility for content, and tolerate fewer excuses for poor behaviour. This isn’t restricting freedom of speech, only restricting disinformation. Some independents <a href="https://mumbrella.com.au/new-bill-tabled-to-bring-much-needed-accountability-to-political-advertising-806487">have already</a> introduced bills in parliament on this issue.</p>
<p>If it’s so easy, why hasn’t it been done? Because that requires political support. Considering politicians are the ones who benefit most from the existing framework, we don’t need a negative ad to tell us how unlikely they are to do anything about it anytime soon.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225774/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Hughes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>As political parties desperately battle for voters’ attention, cybersquatting is one of many online tools in the toolkit. It’s only effective at further diminishing trust in government.Andrew Hughes, Lecturer, Research School of Management, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2097602023-07-21T12:27:14Z2023-07-21T12:27:14Z6 ways AI can make political campaigns more deceptive than ever<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/538357/original/file-20230719-19-faci2s.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=8%2C26%2C5982%2C3781&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There are real fears that AI will make politics more deceptive than it already is.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/engineer-designing-ai-technology-with-reflection-on-royalty-free-image/1455352989?phrase=artificial+intelligence+&adppopup=true">Westend61/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Political campaign ads and donor solicitations have long been deceptive. In 2004, for example, U.S. presidential candidate John Kerry, a Democrat, aired an ad stating that Republican opponent George W. Bush “says sending jobs overseas <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764205279440">‘makes sense’</a> for America.” </p>
<p><a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2004/04/outsourcing-jobs-the-president-said-that/">Bush never said</a> such a thing. </p>
<p>The next day Bush responded by releasing an ad saying Kerry “supported higher taxes <a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2004/04/bush-ad-is-troubling-indeed/">over 350 times</a>.” This too was a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764205279440">false claim</a>. </p>
<p>These days, the <a href="https://www.washington.edu/news/2021/11/08/political-ads-2020-presidential-election-collected-personal-information-spread-misleading-information/">internet has gone wild with deceptive</a> political ads. Ads often pose as polls and have misleading clickbait headlines.</p>
<p>Campaign fundraising solicitations are also rife with deception. An analysis of 317,366 political emails sent during the 2020 election in the U.S. found that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517221145371">deception was the norm</a>. For example, a campaign manipulates recipients into opening the emails by lying about the sender’s identity and using subject lines that trick the recipient into thinking the sender is replying to the donor, or claims the email is “NOT asking for money” but then asks for money. Both <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/26/us/politics/recurring-donations-seniors.html">Republicans and Democrats do it</a>.</p>
<p>Campaigns are now rapidly <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/25/technology/ai-elections-disinformation-guardrails.html">embracing artificial intelligence</a> for composing and producing ads and donor solicitations. The results are impressive: Democratic campaigns found that donor <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/28/us/politics/artificial-intelligence-2024-campaigns.html">letters written by AI were more effective</a> than letters written by humans at writing personalized text that persuades recipients to click and send donations. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LKQiTpiPN7I?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">A pro-Ron DeSantis super PAC featured an AI-generated imitation of Donald Trump’s voice in this ad.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And <a href="https://theconversation.com/ai-could-shore-up-democracy-heres-one-way-207278">AI has benefits for democracy</a>, such as helping staffers organize their emails from constituents or helping government officials summarize testimony.</p>
<p>But there are <a href="https://theconversation.com/chatbots-can-be-used-to-create-manipulative-content-understanding-how-this-works-can-help-address-it-207187">fears that AI will make politics more deceptive</a> than ever.</p>
<p>Here are six things to look out for. I base this list on <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=50tVKogAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">my own experiments</a> testing the effects of political deception. I hope that voters can be equipped with what to expect and what to watch out for, and learn to be more skeptical, as the U.S. heads into the next presidential campaign. </p>
<h2>Bogus custom campaign promises</h2>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2021.1978033">My research</a> on the 2020 presidential election revealed that the choice voters made between Biden and Trump was driven by their perceptions of which candidate “proposes realistic solutions to problems” and “says out loud what I am thinking,” based on 75 items in a survey. These are two of the most important qualities for a candidate to have to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2021.1978033">project a presidential</a> image and win. </p>
<p>AI chatbots, such as <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2023/07/13/chatgpt-everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-open-ai-powered-chatbot/">ChatGPT</a> by OpenAI, <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/23/23609942/microsoft-bing-sydney-chatbot-history-ai">Bing Chat</a> by Microsoft, and <a href="https://www.reuters.com/technology/googles-ai-chatbot-bard-expands-europe-brazil-take-chatgpt-2023-07-13/">Bard</a> by Google, could be used by politicians to generate customized campaign promises deceptively microtargeting voters and donors. </p>
<p>Currently, when people scroll through news feeds, the articles are logged in their computer history, which are <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1717563">tracked by sites such as Facebook</a>. The user is tagged as liberal or conservative, and also <a href="https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2206.00397">tagged as holding certain interests</a>. Political campaigns can place an ad spot in real time on the person’s feed with a customized title. </p>
<p>Campaigns can use AI to develop a repository of articles written in different styles making different campaign promises. Campaigns could then embed an AI algorithm in the process – courtesy of automated commands already plugged in by the campaign – to generate bogus tailored campaign promises at the end of the ad posing as a news article or donor solicitation. </p>
<p>ChatGPT, for instance, could hypothetically be prompted to add material based on text from the last articles that the voter was reading online. The voter then scrolls down and reads the candidate promising exactly what the voter wants to see, word for word, in a tailored tone. My experiments have shown that if a presidential candidate can align the tone of word choices with a voter’s preferences, the politician will seem <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/psq.12299">more presidential and credible</a>. </p>
<h2>Exploiting the tendency to believe one another</h2>
<p>Humans tend to automatically believe what they are told. They have what scholars call a “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X14535916">truth-default</a>.” They even fall prey to seemingly <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101380">implausible</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqz001">lies</a>. </p>
<p>In <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/psq.12809">my experiments</a> I found that people who are exposed to a presidential candidate’s deceptive messaging believe the untrue statements. Given that text produced by ChatGPT can shift people’s <a href="https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3544548.3581196">attitudes and opinions</a>, it would be <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2020.1833357">relatively easy for AI to exploit</a> voters’ truth-default when bots stretch the limits of credulity with even more implausible assertions than humans would conjure.</p>
<h2>More lies, less accountability</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/28/technology/ai-chatbots-chatgpt-bing-bard-llm.html">Chatbots</a> such as ChatGPT are prone to make up stuff that is <a href="https://towardsdatascience.com/llm-hallucinations-ec831dcd7786">factually inaccurate</a> or totally nonsensical. <a href="https://theconversation.com/chatbots-can-be-used-to-create-manipulative-content-understanding-how-this-works-can-help-address-it-207187">AI can produce deceptive information</a>, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/chatgpt-under-investigation-by-ftc-21e4b3ef">delivering false statements</a> and misleading ads. While the most unscrupulous human campaign operative may still have a smidgen of accountability, <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-ai-could-take-over-elections-and-undermine-democracy-206051">AI has none</a>. And OpenAI acknowledges flaws with ChatGPT that lead it to provide biased information, disinformation and outright <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/13/technology/chatgpt-investigation-ftc-openai.html">false information</a>. </p>
<p>If campaigns <a href="https://theconversation.com/chatbots-can-be-used-to-create-manipulative-content-understanding-how-this-works-can-help-address-it-207187">disseminate AI messaging without any human filter</a> or moral compass, lies could get worse and more out of control. </p>
<h2>Coaxing voters to cheat on their candidate</h2>
<p>A New York Times columnist had a lengthy chat with Microsoft’s Bing chatbot. Eventually, the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/16/technology/bing-chatbot-transcript.html">bot tried to get him to leave his wife</a>. “Sydney” told the reporter repeatedly “I’m in love with you,” and “You’re married, but you don’t love your spouse … you love me. … Actually you want to be with me.” </p>
<p>Imagine millions of these sorts of encounters, but with a bot trying to ply voters to leave their candidate for another.</p>
<p>AI <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-ai-could-take-over-elections-and-undermine-democracy-206051">chatbots can exhibit partisan bias</a>. <a href="https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.17548">For example</a>, they currently tend to skew far more left politically – holding liberal biases, expressing 99% support for Biden – with far less diversity of opinions than the general population. </p>
<p>In 2024, Republicans and Democrats will have the opportunity to fine-tune models that inject political bias and even chat with voters to sway them. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two men in dark suits debating each other from different lecterns." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/538526/original/file-20230720-21-n7jzt4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/538526/original/file-20230720-21-n7jzt4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/538526/original/file-20230720-21-n7jzt4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/538526/original/file-20230720-21-n7jzt4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/538526/original/file-20230720-21-n7jzt4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/538526/original/file-20230720-21-n7jzt4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/538526/original/file-20230720-21-n7jzt4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In 2004, a campaign ad for Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, left, lied about his opponent, Republican George W. Bush, right. Bush’s campaign lied about Kerry, too.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/TOPIXBUSHKERRYDEBATE2004/b5b29d1aaae4da11af9f0014c2589dfb/photo?Query=john%20kerry%20george%20bush&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=&totalCount=21&currentItemNo=17">AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Manipulating candidate photos</h2>
<p>AI can <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2022/12/13/image-generating-ai-can-copy-and-paste-from-training-data-raising-ip-concerns/">change images</a>. So-called “deepfake” videos and pictures are common in politics, and they are <a href="https://nypost.com/2023/07/07/trump-and-biden-deep-fakes-take-ai-to-new-scary-level-in-live-debate/">hugely advanced</a>. Donald Trump has used AI to create a <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattnovak/2023/03/23/donald-trump-shares-fake-ai-created-image-of-himself-on-truth-social/?sh=2ef8d92e71f6">fake photo</a> of himself down on one knee, praying. </p>
<p>Photos can be tailored more precisely to influence voters more subtly. In <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X211045724">my research</a> I found that a communicator’s appearance can be as influential – and deceptive – as what someone actually says. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2021.1978033">My research</a> also revealed that Trump was perceived as “presidential” in the 2020 election when voters thought he seemed “sincere.” And getting people to think you “seem sincere” through your nonverbal outward appearance is a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2011.01407.x">deceptive tactic</a> that is more convincing than saying things that are actually true.</p>
<p>Using Trump as an example, let’s assume he wants voters to see him as sincere, trustworthy, likable. Certain alterable features of his appearance make him look insincere, untrustworthy and unlikable: He <a href="https://cdn.theatlantic.com/thumbor/gJkg8WGmmR5htVmKBfaOtRU_93A=/0x130:3492x2094/1952x1098/media/img/mt/2019/01/AP_19009087975304/original.jpg">bares his lower teeth</a> when he speaks and <a href="https://youtu.be/wiyUYMWtGPA">rarely</a> <a href="https://www.facebook.com/NBCNews/videos/voter-to-president-trump-youre-so-handsome-when-you-smile/3580790395346972/">smiles</a>, which makes him <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/S0140-1750(86)90190-9">look threatening</a>. </p>
<p>The campaign could use AI to tweak a Trump image or video to make him appear smiling and friendly, which would make voters think he is more <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2015.5">reassuring</a> and a winner, and ultimately <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/40072946">sincere and believable</a>. </p>
<h2>Evading blame</h2>
<p>AI provides campaigns with added deniability when they mess up. Typically, if politicians get in trouble <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/02/biden-cant-blame-his-staff-his-flailing-presidency/">they blame</a> their staff. If staffers get in trouble they <a href="https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/22/donald-trump-says-intern-apologizes-for-twitter-message-on-iowans-and-corn/">blame the intern</a>. If interns get in trouble they can now blame ChatGPT. </p>
<p>A campaign might shrug off missteps by blaming an inanimate object notorious for <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/01/business/ai-chatbots-hallucination.html">making up complete lies</a>. When Ron DeSantis’ campaign <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLuUmNkS21A">tweeted deepfake</a> photos of <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/is-trump-kissing-fauci-with-apparently-fake-photos-desantis-raises-ai-ante-2023-06-08/">Trump hugging and kissing Anthony Fauci, staffers</a> did not even acknowledge the malfeasance nor respond to reporters’ requests for comment. No human needed to, it appears, if a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/08/us/politics/desantis-deepfakes-trump-fauci.html">robot</a> could hypothetically take the fall. </p>
<p>Not all of <a href="https://theconversation.com/ai-could-shore-up-democracy-heres-one-way-207278">AI’s contributions</a> to politics are potentially harmful. <a href="https://slate.com/technology/2023/04/ai-public-option.html">AI can aid</a> voters politically, helping educate them about issues, for example. However, plenty of horrifying things could happen as <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-ai-could-take-over-elections-and-undermine-democracy-206051">campaigns deploy AI</a>. I hope these six points will help you prepare for, and avoid, deception in ads and donor solicitations.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/209760/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David E. Clementson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Politicians and their campaigns use a lot of methods, including manipulation and deception, to persuade you to vote for them and give them money. AI promises to make those attempts more effective.David E. Clementson, Assistant Professor, Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of GeorgiaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2081322023-06-26T16:14:14Z2023-06-26T16:14:14ZFake news: EU targets political social media ads with tough new regulation proposal<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/533551/original/file-20230622-21-ni00zz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C169%2C3062%2C2258&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/collection-icons-related-politic-including-like-2300374271">Shutterstock/icongeek26</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Throughout Europe, strict rules govern how traditional media operates during elections. Often that means imposing a period of silence so that voters can <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights">reflect on their choices without undue influence</a>. In France, for example, no polls are allowed to be published on the day of an election.</p>
<p>There are, however, very few laws governing what social media companies do in relation to elections. This is a problem now that political parties campaign on these platforms as a matter of course. </p>
<p>So this year, the European Commission intends to <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52021PC0731">introduce regulations</a> for political adverts that will apply across the countries of the EU. </p>
<p>To understand why such action is being considered, we can look to recent concerning practices during election cycles in the UK and US.</p>
<p>As more people consume their news <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/products-eurostat-news/-/ddn-20220824-1">online</a>, and as advertising revenues move online, social media poses a greater threat to fair and transparent elections. </p>
<p>The largest social media networks are for-profit companies. They offer marketing services to other businesses wanting to direct advertising towards network users who are a good match for their products. </p>
<p>To facilitate this, social media companies gather and store behavioural data on our activities – what we click on, what makes us hit the like button, the comments we leave. </p>
<p>Knowing these things for each person gives these companies a detailed understanding of its users. That’s ideal for identifying which user segments will be most receptive to a certain message or ad. </p>
<h2>The user marketplace</h2>
<p>Social media companies generally use an in-house artificial intelligence bidding system, operating in real-time, for each page that is presented to a user. Businesses compete for customer access by signalling how much they are willing to pay to place an ad and the algorithm chooses what will appear on the page, and where.</p>
<p>This inventive model was originally conceived by Google and has radically changed the world of marketing. Because the basis of the model lies in gathering each person’s behavioural activities on the platforms for marketing purposes, it has been described as <a href="https://hbr.org/podcast/2019/06/surveillance-capitalism">surveillance capitalism</a>.</p>
<p>All this is significant enough when we are being marketed products, but using such information in the context of <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-021-00787-w">election campaigning</a> is even more questionable.</p>
<p>A new level of AI, surveillance and business cooperation was achieved when Facebook began <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20170701141827/https:/politics.fb.com/ad-campaigns/">providing services</a> to companies involved in political campaigning. Of particular concern were activities around the use of targeting custom audiences in the 2016 Brexit referendum and the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/data-war-whistleblower-christopher-wylie-faceook-nix-bannon-trump">US presidential election of the same year</a>. </p>
<p>To this day, it is unclear how these activities affected those votes, but we know companies worked together to gather voter information and perform their own behavioural analytics for the segments of interest using, among other things, efficient computer-generated personality judgments based on inappropriately harvested Facebook profiles. Persuasive materials were then delivered at specific times to the users by Facebook.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/commons-committees/culture-media-and-sport/Fake_news_evidence/Ads-supplied-by-Facebook-to-the-DCMS-Committee.pdf">Enlightening information</a> provided to a British parliamentary inquiry by Facebook shows that many of the large number of ads about Brexit sent to users were misleading and employed <a href="https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-send-350m-week-brussels">debatable half-truths</a>.</p>
<p>In the US, the Federal Trades Commission imposed an extraordinary US$5 billion (€4.6 billion) fine on Facebook <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/182_3109_facebook_complaint_filed_7-24-19.pdf">for misleading users</a> and allowing profiles to be shared with business app developers.</p>
<p>In 2018, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg <a href="https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10104712037900071">said</a>: “I’ve been working to understand exactly what happened and how to make sure this doesn’t happen again. The good news is that the most important actions to prevent this from happening again today we have already taken years ago. But we also made mistakes, there’s more to do, and we need to step up and do it.”</p>
<p>However, the EU is clearly not content with a pledge from Facebook not to let this happen again and plans to take a more heavy handed approach than it had in the past. </p>
<p>My own work in this area argues that such business projects as election influencing using advanced AI with behavioural analytics can be considered as <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-96448-5_28">artificial people at work</a> and should be <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331656417_Artificial_Intelligence_in_Politics_Establishing_Ethics">regulated in the same way</a> as any human seeking to influence elections would be.</p>
<h2>The European approach</h2>
<p>There is currently no usable, shared definition of a political advertisement. The EU, therefore, needs to provide a definition that does not infringe on freedom of expression but enables the market to be properly regulated. </p>
<p>With this in mind, we can expect the law to make reference to there being a link between payment and the use or creation of a post. That will help separate ads from personal opinions shared on social media.</p>
<p>Once a political ad has been identified, legislation will require it to be clearly labelled as relating to a specific election or referendum. The name of the sponsor will have to be clear as well as the amount spent on the ad.</p>
<p>A key issue with the US and UK scandals was that amplification techniques had been used to position political ads on Facebook where they could be most effective. </p>
<p>This meant using potentially sensitive information about a person, such as ethnic origin, psychological profiling, religious beliefs or sexual orientation to sort them into groups to be targeted. This will not be allowed in EU countries, unless people give their explicit permission. </p>
<p>In the past, political ads have been delivered to individuals in their own private spaces, and so have not been open to public examination. The new European legislation will aim to put all political ads in an open repository, where they will be open to public scrutiny and regulation.</p>
<p>The European Commission wants to see these regulations come into force before the European elections of 2024. Getting the regulations exactly right will be challenging, and the Commission is in the final stages of discussion on the matter. Regulation of political ads will come in some form or another, making it more possible to hold social media companies to account.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208132/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Kane does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>New laws aim to give the public access to a repository containing every political ad sent out through social media.Tom Kane, Senior Lecturer in Business Analytics, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1968702022-12-20T05:03:40Z2022-12-20T05:03:40ZThe Morrison government spent a record amount on taxpayer-funded advertising, new data reveal<p>The federal government is a big spender in the advertising world, regularly spending more than major companies such as McDonald’s, Telstra and Coles. New data <a href="https://www.finance.gov.au/publications/reports/campaign-advertising-australian-government-departments-and-agencies-report-2021-22">released on Friday by the Department of Finance</a> shows that in the lead-up to the May 2022 election, the Coalition government’s advertising spend skyrocketed yet again.</p>
<p>The past financial year was the biggest year on record for taxpayer-funded advertising. The previous federal government spent A$339 million on taxpayer-funded advertising campaigns in 2021-22, well above the <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Grattan-Institute-advertising-report.pdf">25-year average</a> of about $200 million a year.</p>
<p>In the first six months of 2022, the previous government was the <a href="https://www.mediaweek.com.au/nielsen-unveils-the-biggest-ad-spenders-for-the-first-half-of-2022/">biggest advertising spender</a> in the country.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Graph showing annual federal government spending on advertising campaigns" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/502056/original/file-20221220-16-yqs7ym.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/502056/original/file-20221220-16-yqs7ym.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502056/original/file-20221220-16-yqs7ym.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502056/original/file-20221220-16-yqs7ym.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502056/original/file-20221220-16-yqs7ym.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502056/original/file-20221220-16-yqs7ym.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502056/original/file-20221220-16-yqs7ym.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Morrison government ran 28 separate advertising campaigns last financial year – the most on record. Many were for legitimate purposes, such as an $89 million campaign encouraging take-up of the COVID-19 vaccine, and a $25 million campaign urging people to fill out the Census.</p>
<p>But sometimes, taxpayer-funded advertising campaigns seek to confer a political advantage. This is often achieved by including party slogans or colours, and/or spruiking government achievements – often in the lead-up to elections.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Chart showing the top 20 most expensive taxpayer-funded campaigns for 2021-22" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/502021/original/file-20221219-22-4nj10j.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/502021/original/file-20221219-22-4nj10j.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502021/original/file-20221219-22-4nj10j.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502021/original/file-20221219-22-4nj10j.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502021/original/file-20221219-22-4nj10j.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502021/original/file-20221219-22-4nj10j.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502021/original/file-20221219-22-4nj10j.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why does government advertising spike before elections?</h2>
<p>Taxpayer-funded advertising typically spikes in election years, and 2022 was no exception.</p>
<p>In the six months leading up to the 2022 election, the Coalition government spent about <a href="https://www.finance.gov.au/publications/reports/advertising">$180 million</a>, compared with about $120 million in the six months leading up to the 2019 election.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Chart showing federal government advertising spend spikes just before federal elections" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/502022/original/file-20221219-18-4nzzzb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/502022/original/file-20221219-18-4nzzzb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502022/original/file-20221219-18-4nzzzb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502022/original/file-20221219-18-4nzzzb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502022/original/file-20221219-18-4nzzzb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502022/original/file-20221219-18-4nzzzb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/502022/original/file-20221219-18-4nzzzb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>An otherwise legitimate campaign might be strategically run pre-election to encourage a positive impression of the government. For example, an $18 million federal government campaign on recycling was called out by the then-Labor opposition as “<a href="https://www.joshwilson.org.au/2022/02/15/more-waste-more-rubbish-government-spends-millions-on-greenwashing-again/">ridiculous and self-serving greenwash</a>”.</p>
<p>But usually, pre-election advertising also contains messages that look politically motivated – promoting the government’s policy platform on key election issues.</p>
<p>For example, the $28.5 million Emissions Reduction campaign – the third most expensive campaign of the year – ran from September 2021 to April 2022, and sought to promote the government’s “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/feb/14/coalition-spends-31m-on-ads-spruiking-efforts-to-cut-greenhouse-gas-emissions">good progress</a>” on reducing greenhouse emissions and switching to renewable energy. The campaign clearly used messaging that created a positive image of the government’s performance, and lacked a call to action that might justify it on public interest grounds.</p>
<p><a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/new-politics-depoliticising-taxpayer-funded-advertising/">Grattan Institute analysis</a> shows that typically, about a quarter of government spending on advertising is politicised in some way, by both sides of politics. Historically, about $50 million on average each year has been spent on campaigns that are politicised.</p>
<p>The former government’s “<a href="https://www.finance.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-12/Campaign%20Advertising%20by%20Australian%20Government%20Departments%20and%20Agencies%20-%20Report%202021-22.pdf">COVID-19 Economic Recovery Plan</a>” fell into this category, because it blatantly spruiked the government of the day, without requiring any action or behaviour change from citizens.</p>
<p>Officially, the campaign sought “to inform Australians about the government response to the recurring challenges being faced and reassure [us] there was an adaptable and future-focused plan in place for the economy”.</p>
<p>This was criticised by Labor Senator Tim Ayres in early 2022, <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/treasury-suspends-10m-ad-blitz-promoting-economic-recovery-and-coalitions-job-record-due-to-poll/news-story/5b42f2f756ba253a81bf15c25eb9b933">who asked</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>What possible public purpose is there in ‘Australia’s Economic Plan – we’re taking the next step’? […] What is it asking people to do apart from vote Liberal?</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Why is politicisation of taxpayer-funded advertising harmful?</h2>
<p>Politicisation of taxpayer-funded advertising is wasteful and creates an uneven playing field in elections.</p>
<p>Government advertising budgets are well above the expenditure of individual political parties, even in election years.</p>
<p>We won’t know until February 2023 how much political parties spent in the 2022 federal election. But in the lead-up to the 2019 election, <a href="https://transparency.aec.gov.au/download">the Coalition spent $178 million, Labor $122 million, and Clive Palmer $89 million</a>, with advertising only a portion of their expenses.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-big-money-influenced-the-2019-federal-election-and-what-we-can-do-to-fix-the-system-131141">How big money influenced the 2019 federal election – and what we can do to fix the system</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>How things should change</h2>
<p>The new federal government has announced it will cut taxpayer-funded advertising, although by how much is not yet clear. Labor has promised to tackle <a href="https://www.adnews.com.au/news/the-federal-government-slashes-advertising-budget">advertising</a> as part of its broader “rorts and waste” audit.</p>
<p>That promise to cut wasteful spending will be best tested by whether Labor tightens the rules and oversight for government advertising.</p>
<p>Public money should not be used to spruik government policies. It should be used only on public-interest advertising campaigns that have a clear “need to know” message and a call to action.</p>
<p>An independent panel should be established to check compliance. The panel should have the power to knock back campaigns that aren’t compliant – whether they are politicised, or more generally don’t offer value for money.</p>
<p>And if the rules are broken, then the political party – not the taxpayer – should foot the bill for the entire advertising campaign.</p>
<p>Establishing a proper process is the only way to truly reduce waste and restore public confidence in genuinely important government messages.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Kate Griffiths and Anika Stobart are coauthors of <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/new-politics-depoliticising-taxpayer-funded-advertising/">New politics: Depoliticising taxpayer-funded advertising</a>, Grattan Institute, 2022.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/196870/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments, $4 million from BHP Billiton, and $1 million from NAB. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and contribute to funding Grattan Institute's activities. Grattan Institute also receives funding from corporates, foundations, and individuals to support its general activities as disclosed on its website.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Griffiths does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Politicisation of taxpayer-funded advertising is wasteful and creates an uneven playing field in elections.Kate Griffiths, Deputy Program Director, Grattan InstituteAnika Stobart, Senior Associate, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1904032022-10-26T12:29:03Z2022-10-26T12:29:03ZWhy campaigns have a love-hate relationship with their signs<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/490942/original/file-20221020-19-h9c3xy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=71%2C431%2C5344%2C3556&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Arizona's cities and towns have been flooded with signage during the heavily contested 2022 elections.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/pedestrians-walk-by-political-campaign-signs-that-are-news-photo/1411737858?phrase=arizona political signs&adppopup=true">Justin Sullivan/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Every election cycle, I’m accustomed to seeing campaign signs. But this past summer, I was struck by the sheer number of them in Scottsdale, Arizona, near where I live. I counted 18 on just one corner of a major intersection. </p>
<p>As a linguist who studies political advertising, I’ve <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/the-popularity-and-irrelevance-of-our-lawn-sign-wars/264488/">read the research</a> arguing that signs don’t make much of a difference. </p>
<p>Clearly, Arizonans think otherwise.</p>
<p>The deluge of signs during primary season reflected the state’s <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_elections,_2022">heavily contested races</a> for a U.S. Senate seat, U.S. House seats and statewide offices for governor, secretary of state and attorney general.</p>
<p>Why are there so many signs when <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2015.12.002">studies point</a> to their minimal influence on election outcomes? Where might their value lie?</p>
<h2>The history of the political sign</h2>
<p>Claiming street corners and front yards for political advertising is not new. </p>
<p>Some type of street signage in U.S. elections <a href="https://millercenter.org/president/jqadams/campaigns-and-elections">has been around for at least 200 years</a>.</p>
<p>The 1828 presidential race between John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson was the first to employ political paraphernalia like buttons, medallions, mugs and posters that bore the candidates’ images and slogans. The candidates relied on their supporters to flaunt this swag to help get out the vote. </p>
<p>In his 2020 book “Political Sign,” <a href="https://tobiascarroll.com/books/political-sign/">Tobias Carroll</a> outlines the gradual development of the political sign to the styles that are familiar today.</p>
<p>Political posters and signs in the mid-1800s were more verbose and could even contain <a href="https://www.loc.gov/item/scsm000501/">song lyrics</a>. Then, beginning in the 1920s, ad agencies professionalized the style of these signs, leading to formats that are now commonplace: 18-by-24-inch placards in yards prominently featuring the candidate’s name and office, along with larger ones on public thoroughfares. </p>
<p>Such signage is not a distinctly American phenomenon. <a href="https://toronto.citynews.ca/2022/05/11/ontario-election-2022-signs-ads-billboards-brochures-campaign/">Canada</a> and the U.S. share a reliance on corrugated plastic signs in yards and thoroughfares. Signs on poles and posters on walls <a href="https://yello.substack.com/p/what-political-design-looks-like">are popular in the U.K.</a>, where political ads on TV are banned. Candidates will advertise in most any country with open elections, and their government will likely make <a href="https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1556492/comelec-warns-private-property-owners-vs-displaying-big-campaign-posters">rules on the size of signs</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A husband and wife pose next to signs on poles representing competing candidates." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/490950/original/file-20221020-26-4y58dp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/490950/original/file-20221020-26-4y58dp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/490950/original/file-20221020-26-4y58dp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/490950/original/file-20221020-26-4y58dp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/490950/original/file-20221020-26-4y58dp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/490950/original/file-20221020-26-4y58dp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/490950/original/file-20221020-26-4y58dp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Political signs affixed to poles are popular in the U.K.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/togetherness-ends-at-the-ballot-box-for-ann-and-derek-news-photo/90769697?phrase=political%20lawn%20signs&adppopup=true">Manchester Daily Express/SSPL via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Signs don’t vote</h2>
<p>As popular as signs seem to be, political operatives often dismiss them as a <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/the-popularity-and-irrelevance-of-our-lawn-sign-wars/264488/">superfluous hassle</a>. </p>
<p>Campaign managers I’ve spoken to tell me that yard signs matter mostly in hyperlocal elections; while they’re relatively cheap, they still eat into tight budgets. Others complain of signs getting <a href="https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/kari-lakes-signs-in-phoenix-keep-getting-vandalized-13831568">damaged</a> and <a href="https://www.kwch.com/2022/07/28/thefts-drive-e-wichita-homeowners-put-electric-fence-around-vote-yes-sign/">stolen</a>. They’re awkward to transport, and fines loom if they’re wrongly placed or missing required information. <a href="https://nevalleynews.org/16571/news/campaign-signs-election-cyle-scottsdale-public-safety/">All governmental jurisdictions have regulations</a> about when and where they can be placed on public right of ways. </p>
<p>And, as many politicos point out, if you’re going up against a popular candidate, no matter how many signs you put up, it won’t win you the election – <a href="https://www.npr.org/2012/03/10/148351027/how-powerful-is-a-political-yard-sign">signs, after all, don’t vote</a>. One campaign manager did assure me, however, that all candidates need professionally produced signs in order to be considered serious and viable. </p>
<h2>Pinpointing their effect</h2>
<p>Political scientists have long worked to learn what makes advertising strategies effective. Candidates and their campaign managers are eager to learn more about this impact, too.</p>
<p>But studies about campaign signage are complicated by the fact that no two campaigns or election cycles are alike. As a social science researcher, I know that controlling for the effect of signs is tricky when numerous factors influence an election’s outcome, sometimes even after the polls close. </p>
<p>A yard sign is certainly an indicator of an individual voter’s enthusiasm, but determining if it will get their <a href="https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-life-election-campaign-signs-20181018-story.html">neighbors to vote – and vote for the same candidate</a> – is another issue.</p>
<p>Some studies only look at <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics/article/yard-sign-displays-and-the-enthusiasm-gap-in-the-2008-and-2010-elections/7B08A9A572E5A503B7FF4E915DB6012C">typical yard signs</a>, and while less standardized signs on public property share some similarities, the two are distinct.</p>
<p>Campaign signs at corners of major thoroughfares and mass transit stops, I believe, can also be an indication of enthusiasm. Candidates’ campaigns may pay the sign company to place them, but others rely heavily on volunteers to help. Few people, however, see those volunteers, and most likely don’t know how those signs came to be there.</p>
<p>In 2013, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12034">political scientists Cindy Kam and Elizabeth Zechmeister</a> found that name recognition alone can affect perceptions of a candidate’s viability. Extensive signage may help with that and boost potential viability. But factors such as being an incumbent can change that – and, perhaps, obviate the need for signs as a way to boost name recognition.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A lawn lined with signs of U.S. Senate candidate Raphael Warnock." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491417/original/file-20221024-25-xrhr97.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491417/original/file-20221024-25-xrhr97.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491417/original/file-20221024-25-xrhr97.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491417/original/file-20221024-25-xrhr97.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491417/original/file-20221024-25-xrhr97.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491417/original/file-20221024-25-xrhr97.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491417/original/file-20221024-25-xrhr97.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In a tight race, signs certainly don’t hurt.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/campaign-signs-are-seen-outside-early-voting-locations-in-news-photo/1244180085?phrase=campaign%20signs&adppopup=true">Nathan Posner/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2015.12.002">A 2016 study led by political scientist Donald Green</a> notes that lawn signs can have a small effect of “just over one percentage point” and, like other low-tech strategies such as mailers, can play a role when only a few points separate candidates. Even <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/167939/do-political-ads-even-work">high-budget TV ads</a> are largely found to make little difference outside of very close races. In purple Arizona, where the count tally often is tight, it’s possible to argue that signs – and whatever else the budget will allow – could make a difference. </p>
<h2>A simple and easy way to engage</h2>
<p>Campaign signs, like TV ads, are forms of advertising that reach people who may not be plugged into politics. </p>
<p>Yard signs are seen by the neighborhood and may make a difference with residents. Larger numbers of potential voters see signs at major intersections in a metropolitan area like Phoenix and surrounding towns. For example, on a single midweek day, <a href="https://www.tempe.gov/government/engineering-and-transportation/transportation/streets-signals-traffic/traffic-counts">March 3, 2022</a>, a one-mile stretch of road running north and south and sporting several signs on corners saw 32,280 vehicles, according to the city of Tempe, Arizona, where I live.</p>
<p>In hotly contested primary races, numerous candidates are likely new to voters. Public thoroughfare signs mean <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2015.12.002">voters needing more information</a> have a real chance of getting it during a routine car ride. </p>
<p>And a candidate needing more name recognition has a real chance of getting that from regular commuters through some savvy sign placement. Signs including <a href="https://www.flickr.com/gp/asuenglish/28iRTeH423">endorsements</a> or <a href="https://www.flickr.com/gp/asuenglish/z5aPr47098">campaign pledges</a> can transmit additional information over the course of a few seconds at a stoplight. </p>
<p>Signs convey a real diversity of candidates and their beliefs. Even poorly funded candidates can express themselves through signs. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/21/us/politics/us-democracy.html">Despite reports of democratic backsliding</a> in the U.S., the intersection in Scottsdale with 18 signs tells me that the democratic process is, in some ways, still thriving.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/190403/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Karen Adams is affiliated with the Democratic Party through donations. I do not volunteer for the party or a particular candidate. </span></em></p>Supporters and volunteers love them. But it’s difficult for political scientists to determine whether they even influence the outcome of elections, since no two campaigns or election cycles are alike.Karen Adams, Professor of English, Arizona State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1917662022-10-09T10:07:39Z2022-10-09T10:07:39ZAll governments are guilty of running political ads on the public purse. Here’s how to stop it<p>If you watch TV or read the paper, you’ve probably seen ads spruiking the achievements of the federal or state government – from the next big transport project to how they’re reducing the cost of living. While some government ads are needed, many are little more than thinly-disguised political ads on the public dime. </p>
<p>A new <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/new-politics-depoliticising-taxpayer-funded-advertising/">Grattan Institute report</a> shows both Coalition and Labor governments, at federal and state levels, use taxpayer-funded advertising for political purposes. But there is a way to stop this blatant misuse of public money.</p>
<h2>Why do taxpayers fund advertising?</h2>
<p>Federal and state governments combined spend nearly $450 million each year on advertising. And the federal, NSW, and Victorian governments individually spend more than many large private companies such as McDonald’s, Coles, and the big banks (Figure 1).</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/487955/original/file-20221004-20-92lcw1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/487955/original/file-20221004-20-92lcw1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/487955/original/file-20221004-20-92lcw1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487955/original/file-20221004-20-92lcw1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487955/original/file-20221004-20-92lcw1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487955/original/file-20221004-20-92lcw1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487955/original/file-20221004-20-92lcw1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487955/original/file-20221004-20-92lcw1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Figure 1: Governments are a major source of the ads on our screens.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Governments run advertising campaigns to communicate important public messages and to ask us to take action. For example, in recent years we’ve seen a lot of federal and state government advertising about COVID-19 restrictions and how to get vaccinated. </p>
<p>These health messages are in our individual and collective interests, so it is appropriate that governments communicate those sorts of messages and that we – the community – fund them. But this is not true of all taxpayer-funded advertising. </p>
<h2>Governments take advantage of this pot of money</h2>
<p>Our analysis of every federal government advertising campaign over the past 13 years reveals that many were politicised. On average, nearly $50 million each year was spent on campaigns that conferred a political advantage on the government of the day – about a quarter of total annual spending. </p>
<p>Taxpayer-funded advertising is never as overtly political as party-funded advertising, but it still often contains elements aimed at securing an electoral advantage. The three main signs of politicisation we identified in federal and state government advertising were:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>campaign materials that included political statements, party slogans, or party colour schemes. For example, before the last federal election, the federal government published <a href="https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/politics/2022/04/06/liberal-party-campaign-pre-election/">ads</a> in major newspapers that used the Liberal Party blue, alongside a vague statement: “Australia’s economic plan. We’re taking the next step”</p></li>
<li><p>campaigns that were timed to run in the lead-up to an election, without any obvious policy reason for the timing. Spending on government advertising consistently spikes in the lead up to federal elections (see Figure 2)</p></li>
<li><p>campaigns that spruiked the government’s policies or performance and lacked a meaningful call-to-action. For example, the Queensland government spent more than $8 million on two <a href="https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/get-the-facts-out-how-palaszczuk-spends-millions-on-messaging-20220818-p5bb0n.html">campaigns</a> in an election year to “inform Queenslanders of the state’s recovery plan”.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Many federal and state campaigns contained multiple elements of politicisation – using party colours, spruiking government achievements, and running on election eve.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/487952/original/file-20221004-3479-o13clt.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/487952/original/file-20221004-3479-o13clt.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/487952/original/file-20221004-3479-o13clt.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487952/original/file-20221004-3479-o13clt.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487952/original/file-20221004-3479-o13clt.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487952/original/file-20221004-3479-o13clt.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487952/original/file-20221004-3479-o13clt.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487952/original/file-20221004-3479-o13clt.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Figure 2: Government advertising spikes close to elections.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How to depoliticise government advertising</h2>
<p>Taxpayers should not be footing the bill for political messages. It’s a waste of public money, it undermines trust in important government messaging, and it can create an uneven playing field in elections. </p>
<p>In the lead up to the 2019 election, the federal government spent about $85 million of taxpayers’ money on politicised campaigns – on par with the <a href="https://www.bandt.com.au/82-million-dollar-election-2019-ad-spend-roundup/">combined spend by political parties</a> on TV, print, and radio advertising. Oppositions, minor parties, and independents have no such opportunity to exploit public money for saturation coverage.</p>
<p>There are plenty of other ways governments can spruik their policies without drawing on the public purse. Ministers can use Parliament, doorstop interviews, traditional media, and their own large social media reach to promote their policies. And if governments want to convey a political message outside of those channels, they can advertise using party funds.</p>
<p>We recommend stronger rules to limit the scope of taxpayer-funded advertising. Campaigns should run only if they encourage specific actions or seek to drive behaviour change in the public interest. This would allow recruitment ads, tourism campaigns, bushfire or workplace safety campaigns, and anti-smoking ads – to give a few examples. But it would not allow ads that simply promote government policies.</p>
<p>Campaign materials should obviously not promote a party, or the government. And campaigns should run when they will be most effective, not when they will provide a political advantage (such as immediately before an election).</p>
<p>These rules should be enforced by an <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/new-politics-public-appointments/">independent</a> panel, which would check the final campaign materials. The panel should have the power to knock back campaigns that are not compliant – whether they are politicised, or more generally don’t offer value for money (see Figure 3).</p>
<p>Finally, we recommend a simple but strong penalty for breaking the rules: the governing party, not taxpayers, should be liable to pay the costs of any advertising that has not been ticked off by the independent panel. This would discourage governments from subverting good process, and provide a stronger safeguard against misuse of public money.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/487951/original/file-20221004-24-vjbjjg.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/487951/original/file-20221004-24-vjbjjg.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/487951/original/file-20221004-24-vjbjjg.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487951/original/file-20221004-24-vjbjjg.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487951/original/file-20221004-24-vjbjjg.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487951/original/file-20221004-24-vjbjjg.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487951/original/file-20221004-24-vjbjjg.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/487951/original/file-20221004-24-vjbjjg.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Figure 3: A better process for approving taxpayer-funded advertising.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/191766/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments, $4 million from BHP Billiton, and $1 million from NAB. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and contribute to funding Grattan Institute's activities. Grattan Institute also receives funding from corporates, foundations, and individuals to support its general activities as disclosed on its website.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anika Stobart and Danielle Wood do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Using taxpayer-funded advertising for political advantage is rife, but there are ways it can be curbed.Kate Griffiths, Deputy Program Director, Grattan InstituteAnika Stobart, Senior Associate, Grattan InstituteDanielle Wood, Chief executive officer, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1812432022-05-16T19:59:20Z2022-05-16T19:59:20Z‘The relation between politics and culture is clear and real’: how Gough Whitlam centred artists in his 1972 campaign<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/463149/original/file-20220515-65341-j4u4kv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=6%2C0%2C891%2C1125&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Gough Whitlam delivering the 1972 election policy speech at the Blacktown Civic Centre in Sydney, 1972.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">National Archives of Australia via Wikimedia Commons</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As we enter the final week of the election campaign with its scrappy debates and breathlessly seized “gotcha” moments, the impact of Gough Whitlam’s electoral reforms can be seen at every stage. </p>
<p>From votes for 18-year-olds, senate representation in the ACT and Northern Territory, equal electorates and “one vote one value”, Whitlam’s commitment to full franchise and electoral equity remain central to our electoral process.</p>
<p>No less significant is the innovative and dynamic election campaign built around the central theme “It’s Time” which propelled him into office. </p>
<p>“It’s Time” was the perfect two-word slogan, encapsulating the urge for long overdue change after 23 years of coalition government, and carrying that momentum into the election itself. </p>
<p>This was Australia’s first television-friendly, focus-group driven, thoroughly modern campaign. Its impact on political campaigning in this country <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-22/its-time-gough-whitlam-1972-campaign/5831996">was profound</a>. </p>
<p>Behind the glitz of the theme song and the over 200 policies enunciated in the policy speech, a raft of celebrities and leading figures from the arts – authors, artists, actors, musicians – played a major role. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/few-restrictions-no-spending-limit-and-almost-no-oversight-welcome-to-political-advertising-in-australia-181248">Few restrictions, no spending limit, and almost no oversight: welcome to political advertising in Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Not just political star power</h2>
<p>The presence of well-known identities at the launch in Blacktown Civic Centre lent an air of celebration – of celebrity and even glamour – to the dour set pieces that owed more to the old-fashioned stump speeches of decades earlier, still used by the outgoing Prime Minister Billy McMahon.</p>
<p>Led by soul singer Alison MacCallum, household names like singers and musicians Patricia Amphlett “Little Pattie”, Col Joye, Bobby Limb, Jimmy Hannan, actors Lynette Curran from the popular ABC series Bellbird, Terry Norris and Chuck Faulkner generated an immense reach for It’s Time both as a song and as a political moment. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9jykIqQxEOw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Patricia Amphlett <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/timely-campaign-signalled-start-of-whitlams-cultural-sea-change-20121111-296bi.html">recalls</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The ‘It’s Time’ commercial was far more effective than anyone could have imagined. Long before Live Aid, it came as a shock to some people that popular personalities would stand up publicly and be counted for a cause.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>They were not simply there for added political star power. They were there because the arts had been neglected and constrained by decades of unimaginative conservative government – and they shared a mood for change. </p>
<h2>‘Intellectual and creative vigour’</h2>
<p>Whitlam harnessed the deep sense of frustration of the arts community after years of “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/timely-campaign-signalled-start-of-whitlams-cultural-sea-change-20121111-296bi.html">stifling conservatism</a>” in arts policy settings. Direct political intervention in literary grants also had a stultifying effect on cultural production.</p>
<p>The author Frank Hardy’s successful application for a Commonwealth Literary Fund fellowship in 1968 <a href="https://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-674387366/view?sectionId=nla.obj-691244162&partId=nla.obj-674555695#page/n14/mode/1up">had been vetoed</a> by the Gorton coalition government because Hardy was a member of the Communist Party. </p>
<p>Whitlam was a member of the committee that had awarded Hardy the fellowship and it drove his determination to ensure arts bodies operated as autonomous decision-makers.</p>
<p>He brought arts policy to the fore both in the development of his reform agenda and during the election campaign.</p>
<p>He drew <a href="https://west-sydney-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=ROSETTAIE3079&context=L&vid=UWS-WHITLAM&lang=en_US&search_scope=whitlam_scope&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&tab=whitlam_tab&query=title,contains,labor%20and%20literature,AND&mode=advanced&offset=0">a direct link</a> between a healthy cultural sector, national identity and a flourishing political sphere:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>the relation between politics and culture is clear and real. Political vigour has invariably produced intellectual and creative vigour.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>‘Refresh, reinvigorate and liberate’</h2>
<p>The rapid elevation of cultural policy as a major area for change soon after Whitlam came to office on December 5 1972 gave voice to his <a href="https://west-sydney-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=ROSETTAIE3079&context=L&vid=UWS-WHITLAM&lang=en_US&search_scope=whitlam_scope&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&tab=whitlam_tab&query=title,contains,labor%20and%20literature,AND&mode=advanced&offset=0">pre-election commitment</a> to the arts community “to refresh, reinvigorate and liberate Australian intellectual and cultural life”.</p>
<p>Just six days later, in the ninth of the 40 decisions made by the first Whitlam <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Whitlam_ministry">“duumvirate” ministry</a>, the government announced major increases in grants for the arts in every state and the ACT and forecast a major restructure of existing arts organisations.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/463221/original/file-20220516-12-9vwtpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Lance Barnard and Gough Whitlam" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/463221/original/file-20220516-12-9vwtpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/463221/original/file-20220516-12-9vwtpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=603&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463221/original/file-20220516-12-9vwtpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=603&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463221/original/file-20220516-12-9vwtpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=603&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463221/original/file-20220516-12-9vwtpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=757&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463221/original/file-20220516-12-9vwtpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=757&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463221/original/file-20220516-12-9vwtpw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=757&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The first Whitlam Ministry was made up of just Lance Barnard and Gough Whitlam.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">National Archives of Australia via Wikimedia Commons</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>On January 26 1973, Whitlam announced the establishment of the interim Australian Council of the Arts. A range of autonomous craft-specific boards would sit under it – Aboriginal arts, theatre, music, literary, visual and plastic arts, crafts, film and television – with the renowned arts administrator <a href="https://www.nfsa.gov.au/collection/curated/australian-biography-hc-nugget-coombs">H.C. Coombes</a> as its inaugural head. </p>
<p>After years of delay, a newly appointed interim council for the National Gallery began work in 1973 on the new gallery, with James Mollison as interim director.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/james-mollison-the-public-art-teacher-who-brought-the-blue-poles-to-australia-130285">James Mollison: the public art teacher who brought the Blue Poles to Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This was just the beginning of “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/timely-campaign-signalled-start-of-whitlams-cultural-sea-change-20121111-296bi.html">a cultural sea change</a>” in the arts.</p>
<p>There would be reforms in radio with Double J, later Triple J, and the first “ethnic” broadcasting in Australia through 2EA and 3EA. </p>
<p>The film industry was rebooted through the establishment of the Australian Film Commission, the Australian Film & Television School and Film Australia, and an increase in the quota for Australian made television and films. </p>
<p>The Public Lending Rights scheme was introduced to compensate authors for the circulation of their works through libraries. </p>
<p>Kim Williams <a href="https://www.whitlam.org/publications/2019/11/13/whitlam-the-arts-and-democracy">describes</a> the “innovative thinking” behind the close involvement of arts practitioners in policy development and administration as: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>a new ground plane for empowered decision making by artists in a profoundly democratic action for the arts. </p>
</blockquote>
<h2>A new choice</h2>
<p>At a time of relentless funding reductions, cost-cutting and job losses, renewal and revival is desperately needed across our most important cultural institutions. </p>
<p>The dire effects of this decade of neglect can be seen most starkly in the 25% staff cuts and under-resourcing of the National Archives of Australia which, as the highly critical <a href="https://www.ag.gov.au/rights-and-protections/publications/tune-review">Tune review</a> made clear, has led to the disintegration of irreplaceable archival material including recordings of endangered Indigenous languages. The 2022 budget <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-arts-and-culture-appear-to-be-the-big-losers-in-this-budget-180127">only continued</a> those reductions.</p>
<p>We are again at a time when renewal and reinvigoration of the arts is urgently needed – yet it has scarcely featured thus far in this campaign. </p>
<p>The Liberal Party’s <a href="https://www.liberal.org.au/our-policies">policy statements</a> do not feature the arts. In contrast, <a href="https://themusic.com.au/news/labor-2022-election-arts-policy-announcement/YT15dXR3dnk/16-05-22">Labor’s Arts policy</a>, announced last night, promises a “landmark cultural policy” which would restore arms-length funding, explore a national insurance scheme for live events and ensure fixed <a href="https://www.alp.org.au/policies/better-funded-abc">five-year funding terms</a> for the ABC and SBS. </p>
<p>There is a choice for the arts on 21 May between stasis and renewal. I’ll take the renewal, and hope it becomes a renaissance.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-arts-and-culture-appear-to-be-the-big-losers-in-this-budget-180127">Why arts and culture appear to be the big losers in this budget</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/181243/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jenny Hocking receives funding from the Australian Research Council. </span></em></p>Cultural policy has scarcely featured in the 2022 campaign – when Whitlam campaigned in 1972, the arts were centre stage.Jenny Hocking, Emeritus Professor, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1822862022-05-04T20:06:56Z2022-05-04T20:06:56ZWe tracked election ad spending for 4,000 Facebook pages. Here’s what they’re posting about – and why cybersecurity is the bigger concern<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460727/original/file-20220502-17-vmttm6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C27%2C6006%2C3980&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Have you noticed your Facebook and Instagram feed filling up with political ads lately?</p>
<p>The social media strategies of many parties and candidates aim to bypass mainstream media to speak directly to voters, but they are often not as sophisticated as is assumed. </p>
<p>As part of a <a href="https://election-ad-data.uq.edu.au">team studying the digital campaign</a>, we have been tracking what the parties and candidates are doing with their Facebook and Instagram ad spend during the election campaign.</p>
<p>Using ads collected from the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library">Facebook Ad Library API</a> (containing sponsored posts declared by the advertiser as political), we are <a href="https://election-ad-data.uq.edu.au/faq">tracking the ad spend for close to 4,000 pages</a>. We gather fresh data every six hours.</p>
<p>At the halfway point in the election campaign, some clear themes are emerging in the ways the parties and candidates are campaigning online.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-wentworth-project-allegra-spenders-profile-rises-but-polarises-182275">The Wentworth Project: Allegra Spender's profile rises, but polarises</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A big spend by ‘teals’ and Labor – and political fragmentation</h2>
<p>The first is the really significant spend from the “teal” Independents. Historically, many successful federal Independents (such as Tony Windsor, Rob Oakeshott or Cathy McGowan) have come from regional areas.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460715/original/file-20220502-21-jvct6u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460715/original/file-20220502-21-jvct6u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460715/original/file-20220502-21-jvct6u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1188&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460715/original/file-20220502-21-jvct6u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1188&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460715/original/file-20220502-21-jvct6u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1188&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460715/original/file-20220502-21-jvct6u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1493&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460715/original/file-20220502-21-jvct6u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1493&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460715/original/file-20220502-21-jvct6u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1493&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Thus far, Labor is spending more than the Coalition on Facebook ads.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://election-ad-data.uq.edu.au/">UQ Election Ad Data Dashboard</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But they rarely had the resources to execute a campaign of the scale we’re seeing from inner city “teals” like Monique Ryan (running in the seat of Kooyong against Treasurer Josh Frydenberg). </p>
<p>Some are spending A$4,000-$5,000 a week on Facebook and Instagram ads. That is enormous. Very few candidates from the major parties would normally spend that amount. Frydenberg is doing so to try to retain his seat.</p>
<p>The second theme emerging is that, so far, Labor is spending more than the Coalition. That’s a product of Labor’s post-2019 election review, which was damning of their digital campaign and emphasised a digital first strategy.</p>
<p>Thirdly, we’re seeing a real diversity of spending across a range of parties and candidates – Jacqui Lambie in Tasmania, Rex Patrick in South Australia, the Liberal Democrats and the United Australia Party in Queensland, for example. </p>
<p>That reflects the broader fragmentation of the political landscape in Australia. Federal elections in Australia are increasingly complex and multi-dimensional, the campaign online is indicative of this trajectory. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460713/original/file-20220502-98897-7sivyi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460713/original/file-20220502-98897-7sivyi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460713/original/file-20220502-98897-7sivyi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=373&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460713/original/file-20220502-98897-7sivyi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=373&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460713/original/file-20220502-98897-7sivyi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=373&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460713/original/file-20220502-98897-7sivyi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=468&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460713/original/file-20220502-98897-7sivyi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=468&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460713/original/file-20220502-98897-7sivyi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=468&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Spending in the seat of Kooyong and Wentworth has been high.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://election-ad-data.uq.edu.au/">UQ Election Ad Data Dashboard</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What are candidates and parties posting about?</h2>
<p>In inner city seats where teal independents are running, the number one issue is overwhelmingly climate change. But “environment” or “climate” is not one of they key terms we have found for the major parties across Australia. Instead, jobs, Medicare and health are more prominent.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460724/original/file-20220502-24-3tdoxn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460724/original/file-20220502-24-3tdoxn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460724/original/file-20220502-24-3tdoxn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460724/original/file-20220502-24-3tdoxn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460724/original/file-20220502-24-3tdoxn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460724/original/file-20220502-24-3tdoxn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460724/original/file-20220502-24-3tdoxn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460724/original/file-20220502-24-3tdoxn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">‘Lies’ is one of the top terms showing up in posts.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://election-ad-data.uq.edu.au/">UQ Election Ad Data Dashboard</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For those in outer metropolitan and regional areas, the data suggests the cost of living is the key issue parties have identified as determining their vote.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460705/original/file-20220502-18-uk7ybc.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460705/original/file-20220502-18-uk7ybc.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460705/original/file-20220502-18-uk7ybc.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=750&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460705/original/file-20220502-18-uk7ybc.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=750&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460705/original/file-20220502-18-uk7ybc.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=750&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460705/original/file-20220502-18-uk7ybc.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=943&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460705/original/file-20220502-18-uk7ybc.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=943&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460705/original/file-20220502-18-uk7ybc.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=943&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An ad from the Liberal Party of Australia Facebook page.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=550350769782587&set=a.344989720318694">Liberal Party of Australia Facebook page</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Negative campaigning is showing up, too. One of the top terms appearing in ads from the major parties is “lies”.</p>
<h2>Take talk of ‘microtargeting’ with a grain of salt</h2>
<p>While there is always talk of fine-grained and sophisticated microtargeting strategies, there is good reason to be wary of such claims. </p>
<p>There’s a perception we live in this incredible digital age where each message is tailored to our interests or our personalities. But the reality is quite different. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460707/original/file-20220502-16-n5siej.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460707/original/file-20220502-16-n5siej.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460707/original/file-20220502-16-n5siej.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=750&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460707/original/file-20220502-16-n5siej.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=750&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460707/original/file-20220502-16-n5siej.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=750&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460707/original/file-20220502-16-n5siej.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=943&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460707/original/file-20220502-16-n5siej.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=943&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/460707/original/file-20220502-16-n5siej.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=943&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Lying is a common theme in many digital ads.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=531724981645348&set=pb.100044235528995.-2207520000..&type=3">The Australian Labor Party Facebook page.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In fact, a great deal of digital campaigning isn’t that targeted at all. Clive Palmer’s campaign is an extreme example of this, “carpet bombing” the electorate with messages about “freedom”. (A reasonable rebuttal might be: can I be free to not receive these messages?) </p>
<p>The reality is that most political advertising online is little more than what I describe in my <a href="https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-68234-7">recent book</a> as a form of “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrowcasting">narrowcasting</a>”, where targeting is based on a basic segmentation of voters into demographic or geographic groups. </p>
<p>While many of the techniques we see in Australian election campaigns have been used overseas, particularly in the US and the UK, our electoral system and electoral rules are different; a mixed electoral system and compulsory voting changes the dynamic enormously. </p>
<p>In the US and the UK, the primary focus is to “get out the vote” rather than persuade voters. But <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-022-09781-7">the evidence</a> suggests the effects of digital campaigns on mobilisation are limited. For persuasion, it is <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/20531680221076901">even less</a>.</p>
<p>Most parties also lack the resources to engage in highly differentiated and targeted campaign activity.</p>
<p>In research I recently completed with colleagues from six advanced democracies, <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/13540688221084039">we showed</a> most campaign activity builds on pre-existing techniques and are far less sophisticated than is often assumed. </p>
<p>Digital campaigning matters, as voters are online. It educates, it informs, it drives the conversation and it can have effects on social cohesion.</p>
<p>But the idea digital campaigning is the canary in the coalmine of electoral manipulation in Australia is hyperbole.</p>
<h2>Data privacy is the broader concern</h2>
<p>Two significant digital campaigning issues we should be concerned about are data privacy and cybersecurity. </p>
<p>Australia is one of the few advanced democracies where political parties are completely <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-did-politicians-and-political-parties-get-my-mobile-number-and-how-is-that-legal-168750">exempt from privacy legislation</a>. </p>
<p>They are able to acquire all sorts of data about you, from the Australian Electoral Commission, from data they collect when they speak to voters and from digital tracking data.</p>
<p>Should we be comfortable with parties collecting this information about us, especially when much of it provides <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/hacking-the-electorate/C0D269F47449B042767A51EC512DD82E">limited campaigning or educational value</a> to <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/23723484">parties</a>?</p>
<p>The privacy concerns are significant but so is the broader risk of domestic or foreign actors seeking to acquire this data to sow discord.</p>
<p>Since 2016, political parties in countries such as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/18/australia-political-parties-hacked-sophisticated-state-actor">Australia</a>, the <a href="https://labour.org.uk/about-your-data/">UK</a>, the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-election-cyber-biden-exclusive-idUKKBN2610IG">US</a>, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/german-parties-targeted-in-cyberattack-1474470695">Germany,</a> <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-politics-5star-idUSKBN1CA1TM">Italy </a>and <a href="https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2019/04/08/canadian-political-parties-already-targeted-by-foreign-hacking-electronic-spy-agency-says.html?rf">Canada</a> have been the targets of cybersecurity attacks. Many see political parties as the <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/european-election-security-political-parties-cybersecurity/">weak link in the election security</a> of democracy.</p>
<p>That represents a broader risk for all of us. </p>
<p>It is important for us to track what parties and candidates are doing online during a campaign.</p>
<p>But we also need to identify where the real vulnerabilities are, as the threats online are only likely to increase. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/below-the-line-will-different-cultural-groups-favour-one-side-of-politics-this-federal-election-podcast-182236">Below the Line: Will different cultural groups favour one side of politics this federal election? – podcast</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/182286/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Glenn Kefford receives funding from the ARC.</span></em></p>The social media strategies of many parties and candidates aim to bypass mainstream media to speak directly to voters, but they are often not as sophisticated as is assumed.Glenn Kefford, Senior Lecturer (Political Science), The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1820582022-04-29T02:26:45Z2022-04-29T02:26:45ZClive Palmer’s promise to cap mortgage rates at 3% would make it much harder to get a home loan<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/460476/original/file-20220429-25458-nh3jb8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4031%2C3024&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">The Conversation</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party continues to make waves in the federal election campaign, most recently with advertisements on massive billboards pledging a “maximum 3% interest rate on all home loans for five years”. But does this promise stack up? </p>
<p>Keeping mortgage rates at their record lows for five years is a bold promise. Especially because – as Clive Palmer well knows – the government doesn’t set interest rates. </p>
<p>The key driver is the Reserve Bank of Australia, which sets the cash rate to keep inflation at a low and stable level of 2-3%. But once the cash rate is set, every other bank is entitled to lend money out at whatever competitive rate they want. They frequently diverge from the cash rate based on their cost of obtaining funding from Australian savers and from overseas.</p>
<p>On its <a href="https://www.unitedaustraliaparty.org.au/united-australia-party-outlines-economic-plan-for-freedom-and-prosperity/">website</a>, the United Australia Party (UAP) says it would “use the power of the Constitution to put a cap on the bank home lending rate at a maximum of 3% for the next five years.” (It also promises to introduce a 15% export licence for all iron ore exports from Australia, and “pledge the proceeds from such licences to be used for the retirement of the one trillion-dollar debt mountain that Australia faces”.)</p>
<p>For a moment, let’s run with this 3% idea from the UAP. Imagine for a minute it held the balance of power or even had a majority in both houses of parliament.</p>
<p>If UAP really did intend to try and deliver on an election promise to cap interest rates at 3% for five years, what would the flow-on effects be?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/5-interview-questions-for-the-next-rba-deputy-governor-179369">5 interview questions for the next RBA deputy governor</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Mortgages just for the wealthiest</h2>
<p>The government did control interest rates for many years, until deregulation in the Hawke years. Government control of interest rates and the banking sector made home loans very hard to get, forcing Australians to set up inefficient building societies and credit unions to skirt around the regulations.</p>
<p>But, say the UAP passed a law saying you can’t lift interest rates above 3% – no matter what. You will soon run into problems.</p>
<p>The first is that if banks can’t make a profit on mortgages – if, for example, it costs 4% to borrow and they can only charge 3% – then lending doesn’t make financial sense for them. The banks will just stop writing mortgages entirely.</p>
<p>Even if they can squeak a small profit margin they may only write mortgages for the wealthiest and safest Australians to lend to. Wealthy households are less likely to default and thus are cheaper for banks to lend to.</p>
<p>In other words, a 3% cap on interest rates would lead to a situation where either banks stop mortgages entirely or greatly restrict them. A lot of would-be home owners will not be able to get a mortgage at all. </p>
<p>And if you can’t get a mortgage at all, then for most of us it doesn’t matter what the rate is because you can’t buy a house in the first place. If lending dried up, the number of house buyers would plummet, which would devalue homes. </p>
<p>The only thing worse than a banking system that is expensive is one that is in crisis and potentially getting bailed out or going bankrupt, which might very well imperil the financial stability of the banking sector and derail the economy.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1515224118177968130"}"></div></p>
<h2>OK, how else could they ensure a 3% interest rate for people?</h2>
<p>Apart from changing the law, another way to deliver on this commitment is by hugely increasing government spending. </p>
<p>Perhaps the government could pay home owners the difference between whatever their interest rate is and the promised 3%. So, say your interest rate was 4%. That’s 1% more than the promised 3%, so the government could pay that 1% difference for you, using taxpayer money.</p>
<p>Of course, that would be incredibly costly. Australia’s household debt is almost twice its income. Paying even a small share of the interest payments would be an enormous burden on the budget.</p>
<p>It would be, in effect, a subsidy for all mortgage owners; a hugely expensive giveaway to the richest people in Australia.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/few-restrictions-no-spending-limit-and-almost-no-oversight-welcome-to-political-advertising-in-australia-181248">Few restrictions, no spending limit, and almost no oversight: welcome to political advertising in Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Alright then, what if we just changed the RBA’s job description?</h2>
<p>There is a third way you could cap interest rates at 3% and that is to rewrite the RBA’s mandate and ban them from lifting the cash rate for five years.</p>
<p>But the reason the RBA pushes up interest rates is to help control inflation and the cost of living. That’s why there’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/inflation-hits-an-extraordinary-5-1-how-long-until-mortgage-rates-climb-181832">talk of an interest rate rise</a> after inflation hit a whopping 5.1% this week.</p>
<p>Banning the RBA from pushing up rates comes with real inflationary risks. That would overheat the economy and drive up inflation. You’d see hugely higher prices at the supermarket and the fuel pump.</p>
<p>Perhaps you think homeowners are more deserving than renters or pensioners or anyone in the economy who doesn’t have a mortgage. But I don’t.</p>
<h2>No free lunch</h2>
<p>In a recent podcast <a href="https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-andrew-wilkie-invites-independent-candidates-to-call-him-for-a-chat-about-approaching-a-hung-parliament-181604">interview</a> with Michelle Grattan, independent MP Andrew Wilkie mentioned this UAP ad, saying:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In my opinion, this is the worst campaign I’ve observed, as far as the mud slinging and the dishonesty. There used to be some limits on the dishonesty of the political parties and the candidates but there seem to be no limits this election. There’s a billboard down the road from Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party, promising a 3% maximum mortgage rate. I mean, they know that’s just nonsense.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Whatever your view, it’s worth remembering there is no such thing as a free lunch in the economy. If you want to make something cheaper, you have to pay for it some other way.</p>
<p>You either have to pay for it from taxpayers’ money or you make the banks pay, which comes with a real risk of financial crisis.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/game-of-loans-australias-reserve-bank-loses-its-heir-apparent-178994">Game of Loans: Australia's Reserve Bank loses its heir apparent</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/182058/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>From 2011 to 2013 Isaac Gross worked as an economist for the Reserve Bank of Australia.
</span></em></p>The government used to set interest rates but it doesn’t anymore. If UAP really did try to deliver on an election promise to cap interest rates at 3% for five years, what would the consequences be?Isaac Gross, Lecturer in Economics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1766762022-04-14T05:44:01Z2022-04-14T05:44:01ZHope? Contempt? Reciprocity? How each political party’s election ads reveal their key messages<p>The federal election campaign is underway and political advertising has really started to ramp up. But who is the target audience for each party’s ad, what are their key messages and how effective will they be?</p>
<p>I research how people or organisations use stories to effect change via, for example, political advertising or entertainment. When I look at each party’s early campaign ads, here’s what stands out for me.</p>
<h2>The Greens: hope, change, power</h2>
<p>The key message at the centre of The Greens ads is hope.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ciTp4Vq_FMw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Australian Greens ad.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This ad aims to draw attention to “the people demanding change” giving rise to hope – a message that will hit hardest in the early stages of the campaign.</p>
<p>Hope is a powerfully motivating emotion. Probably the most famous recent example is Barack Obama’s “Yes, we can!”, used in a popular <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Barack_Obama_Hope_poster.jpg">poster</a> that boosted interest in his campaign. </p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2005.00130.x">Science suggests</a> hope does not make people remember new policy positions or political personalities. However, voters who already wanted strong climate action, will be more hopeful and likely to cast their actual vote for the Greens after viewing this commercial.</p>
<h2>Labor: a straightforward argument</h2>
<p>The Labor Party relies on arguments as a means of persuading voters:</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R3PRYFc3pJA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Labor Party ad.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Labor wants to persuade Australian voters that the future will be better if you vote for them, underpinned by five key premises: Labor will manufacture more things here, make child care cheaper, lower power bills, invest in fee-free TAFE, and strengthen Medicare.</p>
<p>The argument follows a “topdown” structure, starting out with a general statement idea – that for a better future Australia needs to more local manufacturing, cheaper child care, lower power bills, fee-free TAFE, and stronger Medicare. </p>
<p>From this, a more specific, logical conclusion derived – that Labor can deliver these things to you, the voter.</p>
<p>Whether or not this argument resonates with voters depends firstly on the extent to which voters want these things and secondly on whether they believe Labor can make them happen.</p>
<h2>Liberal Party: contempt</h2>
<p>The Liberal Party’s ads focus attention on contempt for Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese:</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KWQlncRXDKA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Liberal Party ad.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Contempt is an intense, powerful emotion with clear influence on voters. Contempt encourages avoidance; we try to create as much distance between us and the subject of contempt as we can. Such a response is seldom reasoned, which can make it difficult to counter.</p>
<p>The Liberal Party’s ads aim to make us link Albanese – and by extension, Labor – with a sense of contempt and disgust.</p>
<p>The emotion in these ads seems to be directed at undecided voters, in an effort to harden attitudes.</p>
<h2>The National Party: one good turn deserves another</h2>
<p>The National Party’s ads centre on the idea of reciprocity.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/81-rTftgJlk?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">National Party ad.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The ads hinge on two crucial ideas:</p>
<p>1) if voters want to keep bringing regional Australia to life, they need to give their vote to the Nationals</p>
<p>2) one good turn deserves another; since regional Australia has received from the Nationals, the ads imply, they should give something back.</p>
<p>This network of obligations enables the National Party to forge relationships with regional voters. Failure to honour and observe the rule of reciprocity is deeply frowned upon among many regional Australians; the rule of reciprocity is so influential it does not matter how much regional Australians like the National Party. </p>
<p>If the Nationals do regional Australia a favour, then plenty of regional Australians may feel obliged to do something in return.</p>
<p>People are inclined to reciprocate not only because they are afraid of being judged negatively, but also because they consider it the right thing to do.</p>
<h2>The United Australia Party: ‘that’s my kind of party’</h2>
<p>This United Australia Party (UAP) ad uses music to create a particular ambience.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dMnD_jaOkQo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">United Australia Party ad.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Music’s behavioural influence is often automatic and the effect considerable.</p>
<p>The attention-grabbing song in this ad – “That’s my kind of party. The United Australia Party” – is energetic. It inspires action. It also positions the UAP as an alternative to the major parties.</p>
<p>This ad may be targeting a voter who either feels voting is not that important or that all the major parties are similar. It may hit a note with a voter who is hesitating about where to direct their vote and is tired of the usual political offerings.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176676/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom van Laer is a member of the National Tertiary Education Union.</span></em></p>The federal election campaign is underway and political advertising has really started to ramp up. But who is each party targeting and what’s their key message?Tom van Laer, Associate Professor of Narratology, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1812482022-04-14T05:20:11Z2022-04-14T05:20:11ZFew restrictions, no spending limit, and almost no oversight: welcome to political advertising in Australia<p>So the federal election is on. Billboards are suddenly plastered with party slogans, campaign ads are all around us, and our social media feeds are flaring up with political spin.</p>
<p>Political advertising is a major feature of Australian election campaigns. But sometimes it can be difficult to separate facts from scare campaigns, or even to distinguish a government ad from a party ad.</p>
<p>So what are the rules that govern political advertising in the upcoming election campaign?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/as-federal-government-spending-on-small-transport-projects-creeps-up-marginal-seats-get-a-bigger-share-179464">As federal government spending on small transport projects creeps up, marginal seats get a bigger share</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>There are very few restrictions on political advertising</h2>
<p>Political advertising seeks to promote a political party, candidate, or political agenda. These ads can come from political parties themselves, or from anyone else who wants to influence voters and can afford to pay for one. </p>
<p>We have already seen several major advertising campaigns launched for this election, including the Coalition’s “<a href="https://twitter.com/ScottMorrisonMP/status/1512675612796006404">Why I love Australia</a>”, Labor’s “<a href="https://twitter.com/AlboMP/status/1504336732367425539">A better future</a>”, and a series of prominent United Australia Party <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMnD_jaOkQo&ab_channel=UnitedAustraliaParty">ads</a>. </p>
<p>There are no limits on how much political parties, independent candidates, or third parties can spend in a federal election. So the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/clive-palmer-spends-100-times-more-than-major-parties-on-advertising-20220218-p59xq4.html">race is on</a> to raise more money than your opponents so that you can spread your message further and wider. </p>
<p>Some funding also comes from the taxpayer to help cover campaign expenses, such as advertising. The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) reimburses parties or candidates for some of their spending according to the <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/parties_and_representatives/public_funding/">share of the primary vote they achieve</a> in the election. In the last federal election this amounted to <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_Representatives/financial_disclosure/files/reports/funding-disclosure-2019.pdf">A$70 million in funding</a>. </p>
<p>Political ads need only meet some <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/about_aec/Publications/Backgrounders/authorisation.htm#electoralMatter">basic requirements</a>, which are monitored by the AEC and the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). </p>
<p>These include identifying who authorised the ad – that’s the bit at the end of a TV or radio ad that sounds like someone trying to break a fast-talking record – and not misleading voters on <em>how</em> <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/about_aec/Publications/Backgrounders/authorisation.htm">to cast a vote</a>.</p>
<p>If an ad encourages voters to fill out their voting paper incorrectly, the AEC can intervene, but only to correct that specific part of the ad. ACMA also enforces a “blackout period” on TV and radio ads in the final few days before election day. </p>
<h2>Truth is not a requirement</h2>
<p>When it comes to the content of political ads, there is almost no oversight. </p>
<p>Political ads are not fact-checked. The truth or otherwise of what is said in a political ad is left up to the <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/electoral-communication.htm">voter to determine for themselves</a>.</p>
<p>It’s worth noting this hands-off approach is very different to strict rules around commercial advertising. Where a company is alleged to have misled consumers about a product or service, the matter is investigated, the ad may be pulled, and the company could face fines or further penalties. But there are no consequences for political parties if they lie to voters in their ads. </p>
<p>That means bad-faith characterisations of other parties’ policies – or even flatly inaccurate ones – are perfectly OK under the law.</p>
<p>That’s how misleading scare campaigns have been allowed to feature so prominently in recent elections. </p>
<p>During the 2019 election campaign, the Coalition hit Labor with false advertising about “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/08/it-felt-like-a-big-tide-how-the-death-tax-lie-infected-australias-election-campaign">death taxes</a>”. And Labor ran the false “Mediscare” <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/no-more-mediscares-australians-want-political-truth-in-advertising-laws-20160708-gq1iu2.html">campaign</a> against the Coalition at the 2016 election. Neither of these campaigns broke any rules. </p>
<p>Democratic politics, and election campaigns in particular, are naturally a contest of ideas. They involve values, promises, “blue sky” thinking, and unproveable claims. </p>
<p>But deliberately false and misleading advertising hurts the democratic process. It can divert voter attention from the real issues and potentially distort election outcomes. </p>
<p>In an attempt to tackle this problem, both South Australia and the ACT have enacted truth in political advertising laws at the state level. At the federal level, however, it’s a case of anything goes. </p>
<h2>What about government advertising?</h2>
<p>Government advertising is different – or it’s supposed to be. It’s advertising funded by the taxpayer for the legitimate purpose of enabling the government of the day to communicate important information to the public.</p>
<p>Government advertising includes, for example, public campaigns to remind people to get their booster shots, or information on how to access assistance in a domestic violence situation. </p>
<p>But sometimes government advertising can shade into political advertising, particularly when governments make ads spruiking their own performance.</p>
<p>Government advertising often ramps up in the pre-election period. We’ve seen some examples of this recently, in the recent blue-shaded advertisements about “<a href="https://twitter.com/SHamiltonian/status/1510119877536669700/photo/1">Australia’s Economic Plan</a>”, or “<a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/morrison-boosts-making-positive-energy-pre-election-ad-splurge-to-almost-31-million/">Making Positive Energy</a>”. It’s not clear what public benefit is served by ads like these. </p>
<p>Government advertising is subject to <a href="https://www.finance.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-11/campaign-advertising-guidelines.pdf">guidelines</a> that require campaigns to be justified, objective, and fair, and prohibit the promotion of political party interests. But these guidelines are not enforceable.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.finance.gov.au/publications/compliance-advice/compliance-advice-independent-communications-committee-government-advertising-campaigns">Independent Communications Committee</a> reviews all campaigns costing more than $250,000, but it only sees them at the proposal stage, and can only provide advice to government.</p>
<p>It has no power to veto a proposed ad campaign. </p>
<h2>What can we expect during the election period?</h2>
<p>We probably won’t be seeing much government advertising over the coming weeks. </p>
<p>The government is now in “caretaker” mode. <a href="https://www.pmc.gov.au/resource-centre/government/guidance-caretaker-conventions">Caretaker conventions</a> state the Department of Finance and the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet must review all taxpayer-funded advertising and make recommendations on whether the campaigns should proceed or be deferred.</p>
<p>If a campaign gets the green light, the government still has to get the Opposition’s approval. As a result, any government advertising that looks suspiciously like government self-promotion tends to disappear during elections.</p>
<p>But when it comes to political advertising, the sky is the limit – at least while parties’ campaign funds hold out.</p>
<p>We can expect political ads to continue to ramp up over the coming weeks. The onus will be on each voter to sift through the spin for the facts and for the policies that matter to them.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-vomit-principle-the-dead-bat-the-freeze-how-political-spin-doctors-tactics-aim-to-shape-the-news-106453">The vomit principle, the dead bat, the freeze: how political spin doctors' tactics aim to shape the news</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/181248/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments, $4 million from BHP Billiton, and $1 million from NAB. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and contribute to funding Grattan Institute's activities. Grattan Institute also receives funding from corporates, foundations, and individuals to support its general activities as disclosed on its website.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Griffiths does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>We can expect political ads to continue to ramp up over the coming weeks. The onus will be on each voter to sift through the spin for the facts and for the policies that matter to them.Anika Stobart, Associate, Grattan InstituteKate Griffiths, Deputy Program Director, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1698132021-11-03T13:50:28Z2021-11-03T13:50:28ZHow Ontario can rethink its election spending law to ensure fairness, equality<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429450/original/file-20211031-37127-cj52r3.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1588%2C0%2C6490%2C5439&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Back to the drawing board? The Ontario government's changes to third-party election spending laws could be amended to fairly balance people’s Charter rights with meeting legislative objectives.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Geoff Robins </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the months leading up to the next provincial election in Ontario in June, spending for third parties has been rigorously restricted during the <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2021/2021onsc4076/2021onsc4076.pdf">pre-election period</a>.</p>
<p>Changes to election laws often go unnoticed, but these new regulations <a href="https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2021/03/02/doug-fords-new-elections-act-bill-moves-to-silence-critics.html">could have major implications for the freedom of expression</a> exercised by both people and organizations in Ontario over the coming months. </p>
<p>The Ontario government could take action to address freedom of expression concerns while maintaining the spirit of their changes. </p>
<h2>Expenditure limits</h2>
<p>The pre-election period consists of a set amount of time, prior to an election period with a fixed election date, during which third parties have spending limits on political advertisements. </p>
<p>Prior to the <a href="https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/bills/parliament-42/session-1/bill-254/status">changes to the law made in April 2021 by the Doug Ford government,</a> this period lasted six months, spending limits were set at $600,000 and only political advertisements (ads that directly or indirectly promote or oppose a party, leader or candidate) were regulated. </p>
<p>Under the modified law, the pre-election period was extended to 12 months and now includes issues-based advertisements, which also fall under the $600,000 contribution limit. These types of advertisements are used by third parties to raise awareness about specific policy issues. </p>
<p>Even though a <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/superior-court-ontario-spending-law-1.6057575">ruling from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice</a> struck down these new sections for going too far in impinging upon freedom of expression, the Ontario government chose to use Sec. 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms — <a href="https://www.mondaq.com/canada/constitutional-administrative-law/1094362/ontario-passes-new-third-party-advertising-restrictions-in-election-finances-act-using-notwithstanding-clause">known as the notwithstanding clause — to retain them</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/doug-ford-uses-the-notwithstanding-clause-for-political-benefit-162594">Doug Ford uses the notwithstanding clause for political benefit</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It’s important to note that the provincial government attempted to make these laws work within the framework that has guided Canadian regulations of third-party spending.</p>
<p>Known as the <a href="https://lawjournal.mcgill.ca/article/libman-v-quebec-a-g-and-the-administration-of-the-process-of-democracy-under-the-charter-the-emerging-egalitarian-model/">egalitarian model,</a> it seeks to promote fairness and equality by limiting third-party spending during regulated election periods and to reduce the impact of wealth on the electoral process. In practice, this prevents affluent third parties from dominating politics by outspending other, less affluent third parties. </p>
<p>Looking to other jurisdictions, there are adjustments that can be made to the existing law that would maintain the spirit of these new amendments while lowering the impact on the freedom of expression of third parties. </p>
<h2>Possible adjustments</h2>
<p>In the United Kingdom, issues-based advertisements are exempt <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/507954/2904969_Cm_9205_Accessible_v0.4.pdf">during its 12-month regulated period</a> so long as they are <a href="https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/non-party-campaigners-where-start/purpose-test-regulated-period-early-uk-parliamentary-general-election">not sufficiently close or publicly associated to a party, parties or candidate</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429452/original/file-20211031-19-wmwis3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man in a suit and tie stands behind a podium with Canadian flags behind him." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429452/original/file-20211031-19-wmwis3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429452/original/file-20211031-19-wmwis3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429452/original/file-20211031-19-wmwis3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429452/original/file-20211031-19-wmwis3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429452/original/file-20211031-19-wmwis3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429452/original/file-20211031-19-wmwis3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429452/original/file-20211031-19-wmwis3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Greg Essensa, Ontario’s chief electoral officer, speaks to the media in 2018 a few weeks before the Ontario election.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Chris Young</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Greg Essensa, the province’s chief electoral officer, has stated that <a href="https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/committees/general-government/parliament-41/transcripts/committee-transcript-2016-jun-06">issues-based advertising should not be regulated</a> between elections, but said he’d recommended regulating political advertisements between elections. Regulating political advertisements, while excluding issues-based advertising, would strike a “balance between the competing concerns of freedom of speech and electoral equality,” he said.</p>
<p>Therefore, removing Ontario’s limitations on issues-based advertising (while retaining the 12-month window) could be one approach to amending the law. That would give more freedom to third parties who are advocating for specific policy issues while simultaneously reducing the influence of political advertisements prior to an election period.</p>
<p>Alternatively, the Ontario government could choose to go back to having the pre-election period set at six months rather than 12 but hold onto its limits on issues-based ads. This would be similar to how it works via <a href="https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=faq&document=faqelec&lang=e#a10">the fixed election date federally</a> — the pre-election period <a href="https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&dir=pre&document=index&lang=e">begins on June 30 and ends on the day before a general election is called</a>. </p>
<p>Even though issues-based advertisements are not regulated at the federal level during the pre-election period, a shorter six-month pre-election period in Ontario would reduce the risk of unduly infringing upon freedom of expression. </p>
<h2>Must provide an explanation</h2>
<p>If the Ontario government reverts back to a six-month period but keeps its restrictions on issues-based advertisements, it would probably have to demonstrate to those concerned about freedom of expression why maintaining these restrictions is necessary. That’s especially since other jurisdictions have found it sufficient to only regulate political advertisements, not ads focused on issues, during their pre-election periods. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="A man in a suit and tie removes his mask as he starts a news briefing. Ontario flags are behind him." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429451/original/file-20211031-15910-kmd062.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429451/original/file-20211031-15910-kmd062.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429451/original/file-20211031-15910-kmd062.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429451/original/file-20211031-15910-kmd062.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429451/original/file-20211031-15910-kmd062.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429451/original/file-20211031-15910-kmd062.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429451/original/file-20211031-15910-kmd062.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ontario Premier Doug Ford removes his mask to take a question from a journalist as he attends a news briefing.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Chris Young</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While the principles of fairness and equality among third parties during the pre-election period should be upheld, over-regulation during this period could have the reverse effect and prevent participation in the democratic process. </p>
<p>This is because third parties would be limited on how much they can spend to express their views about various policy issues — not their opposition to or promotion of political parties or candidates — through the use of advertisements for an entire year. </p>
<p>Instead of continuing to override the ruling from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, the government could work within the parameters articulated by Canadian courts to ensure that future electoral law decisions fairly balance people’s Charter rights with meeting legislative objectives. </p>
<p>If the Ontario government decides to revisit this ruling after the June election, it should look to other jurisdictions with pre-election periods to compare best practices — and determine what regulations will achieve the most fair and equal outcome for voters.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/169813/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Provincial regulations have major implications for the freedom of expression exercised by individuals and organizations in Ontario in the months leading up to the June election.Valere Gaspard, Research Fellow, Leadership and Democracy Lab, Western UniversityAlec Mazurek, Research Scientist, Political Science, Western UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1687502021-09-30T03:55:20Z2021-09-30T03:55:20ZHow did politicians and political parties get my mobile number? And how is that legal?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423276/original/file-20210927-45889-10mjfd7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C33%2C5607%2C3690&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Former Liberal backbencher Craig Kelly recently spammed large numbers of Australian voters by sending bulk text messages to their mobile phone numbers. </p>
<p>The spam texts, one of which promoted Kelly’s anti-vax views, struck many recipients as an invasion of privacy and triggered thousands of complaints to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1436087541925507087"}"></div></p>
<p>Kelly said the messages were “100% legal.” He is right.</p>
<p>Indeed, Australia’s <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00614">anti-spam law</a> applies only to “commercial” messaging and specifically exempts political communication (Section 44) — including text messages like Kelly’s. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-therapeutic-goods-administration-has-the-power-to-stop-misleading-advertising-so-why-cant-it-stop-craig-kellys-texts-168083">The Therapeutic Goods Administration has the power to stop misleading advertising. So why can't it stop Craig Kelly's texts?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Some have <a href="https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/sms-spam-shakeup-new-laws-could-let-aussies-unsubscribe-from-unwanted-political-text-messages/news-story/6ec6668e6e343a913277ac8487e5a556">proposed</a> changes that would allow people to unsubscribe from unwanted political text messages. </p>
<p>But it is likely in future we will see more, not less, unsolicited text messaging — and not just in politics. </p>
<h2>How did they get my number?</h2>
<p>Kelly, who joined Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party earlier this year, has said he used software to <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/united-australia-party-leader-craig-kelly-defends-spam-messages-20210829-p58mv7.html">generate random mobile numbers</a>.</p>
<p>That’s plausible: there are plenty of <a href="https://www.coolgenerator.com/phone-number-generator">sites</a> that will perform this relatively simple task. </p>
<p>But it is not cheap to upload the random numbers onto a server that can send text messages. It’s also not efficient, as many of the randomly generated numbers will not be real numbers. </p>
<p>Then again, Palmer’s <a href="https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/clive-palmer-spent-83-million-on-failed-election-bid-20200203-p53x4j">track record</a> of lavish electoral expenditure in the 2019 federal election suggests he can afford such an approach. </p>
<p>Kelly did not reveal the actual number of text messages he sent, though it is likely to be in the thousands.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-political-parties-legally-harvest-your-data-and-use-it-to-bombard-you-with-election-spam-148803">How political parties legally harvest your data and use it to bombard you with election spam</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There are plenty of other ways in which your mobile phone number might end up being fodder for marketing campaigns. </p>
<p>Think how many times you provide your private contact details for retail and financial transactions, social media accounts, ID checks, entertainment subscriptions. </p>
<p>Now ask yourself: how often do you read the privacy policy of the company or organisation collecting your data? </p>
<p>The reality is your private details have a commercial value. In the murky world of data harvesting, they can be transferred and bundled up into <a href="https://australiantelemarketingleads.net/shop/consumer-leads/consumer-mobile-numbers-database">large data bases</a> and rented out to <a href="https://www.directmarketinglistsaustralia.com.au/about-us">telemarketers</a> — or they can be <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_data_breaches">leaked</a> or <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/apr/05/facebook-data-leak-2021-breach-check-australia-users">hacked</a>.</p>
<p>These can include your mobile phone numbers.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1431045052403314691"}"></div></p>
<h2>How is that legal?</h2>
<p>By and large Australian phone numbers, including both landline and mobile services, are well secured. Access to the Integrated Public Number Database (IPND), managed by Telstra, is <a href="https://www.acma.gov.au/accessing-ipnd#access-to-unlisted-numbers-ipnd-regulations">overseen by the Australian Communications and Media Authority</a>. </p>
<p>Phone subscribers can choose to have a “silent” (unlisted) number, and can opt out of telemarketing calls via the <a href="https://www.donotcall.gov.au/about/about-the-do-not-call-register/">do not call register</a>.</p>
<p>But even here, there are political exemptions. Researchers can be given permission to call numbers from the IPND to conduct interview-based research – including market research into “federal state and local government electoral matters.”</p>
<p>ACMA can <a href="https://www.acma.gov.au/articles/2021-06/crackdown-financial-services-marketing-kalkine-companies-pay-350000-penalty">punish</a> companies that misuse numbers for “spam” marketing purposes.</p>
<p>But both Telstra and ACMA are clear <a href="https://exchange.telstra.com.au/blocking-political-text-messages/">they can’t block political parties</a>, along with charities and some government agencies, from sending unsolicited marketing numbers.</p>
<h2>What about the electoral roll?</h2>
<p>When you enrol to vote, you provide your full name, date of birth, current residential address, phone number or numbers, email address and citizenship. You also need proof of identity such as a driver’s licence or passport. </p>
<p>These details are <a href="https://twitter.com/AusElectoralCom/status/1437181665282043905">well protected</a> and support Australia’s system of compulsory voting. Again, however, under the Electoral Act, your name and address can be provided to members of parliament, registered political parties and candidates for the House of Representatives.</p>
<p>For both major parties, ALP and Liberal, that information forms the basis of the large data bases they have assembled for targeted campaigning: making phone calls, knocking on doors, sending automated “robocalls” and texting.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1434752533294194692"}"></div></p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1437181665282043905"}"></div></p>
<h2>Why are political parties exempt?</h2>
<p>When Kelly joined Palmer’s party, he not only accessed Palmer’s campaign war chest. Registered political parties enjoy special treatment under Australian electoral law – including entitlement to public funding for their campaign costs, and exemptions from privacy rules governing access to personal data.</p>
<p>The rationale for the exemption is that no regulator should impede the free flow of information about electoral choice. </p>
<p>The argument is that claims and counterclaims by different politicians and parties — even false claims about vaccinations — constitute the lifeblood of democracy and should be resolved, ultimately, at the ballot box, not in the courts. </p>
<p>All this is underpinned by the High Court’s finding that the constitution “implies” the <a href="https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/rights-and-freedoms/freedom-information-opinion-and-expression">freedom of political communications</a> to the extent necessary to allow the operation of democratic government.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/83-of-australians-want-tougher-privacy-laws-nows-your-chance-to-tell-the-government-what-you-want-149535">83% of Australians want tougher privacy laws. Now’s your chance to tell the government what you want</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>For all these reasons, political advertising in Australia is largely unregulated. It doesn’t have to be truthful or factual. Courts and regulators would be reluctant in the midst of an election campaign to adjudicate on truth; voters are expected to have the wisdom to work it all out at the ballot box.</p>
<p>Of course, political parties are not just the beneficiaries of this lack of regulation; they are in a real sense its authors. The capacity of rival parties to collaborate in shaping laws to suit themselves forms a key pillar of the <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/40407077">cartel theory of parties</a>. </p>
<p>The main, virtually the sole, regulatory requirement for political ads is they are “authorised” – that is, they include the name of a person responsible for them. Authorisation provides accountability for political statements. </p>
<h2>Remember ‘Mediscare’?</h2>
<p>Back in 2016, however, SMS messages were not covered by this requirement. At the end of the 2016 federal election campaign, the Queensland Labor Party sent a bulk text message promoting its <a href="https://theconversation.com/three-reasons-why-we-should-have-seen-labors-medicare-sms-coming-62177">scare campaign about Liberal plans to “privatise Medicare”</a>. </p>
<p>The text messages were not authorised and, moreover, purported to come from “Medicare.” </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"755906429681274881"}"></div></p>
<p>The law was <a href="https://twitter.com/JoshButler/status/847218189821853696">tightened</a> in 2019. Kelly’s text messages were <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/FlagPost/2019/April/Authorising_online_political_communication">authorised</a>, by himself. </p>
<h2>Is this likely to happen more often in the future?</h2>
<p>During the Black Summer bushfires, blazes ripped through Cobargo on the far south coast of New South Wales. As part of the nation’s emergency warning system, thousands of landlines and mobile phones — my own included — were <a href="https://www.emergencyalert.gov.au/frequently-asked-questions/how-will-it-work-on-my-landline.html">alerted</a> with urgent warnings to evacuate. </p>
<p>Alerts were sent to mobiles according to their registered service address and also to the “last known location of the handset at the time of the emergency.” </p>
<p>It is a far cry from Kelly, and no one envisages political parties being able to target voters by this kind of electronic geo-location. </p>
<p>But it suggests the ability to send brief, urgent and unsolicited text messages, to large numbers of people, is too valuable to ignore. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/three-reasons-why-we-should-have-seen-labors-medicare-sms-coming-62177">Three reasons why we should have seen Labor's 'Medicare SMS' coming</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168750/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephen Mills does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It is likely in future we will see more, not less, unsolicited text messaging — and not just in politics.Stephen Mills, Hon Senior Lecturer, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1681972021-09-20T20:05:52Z2021-09-20T20:05:52ZWhich federal MP is spending the most on Facebook advertising? (Hint: it is not Craig Kelly)<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422016/original/file-20210920-48840-1rp3y31.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Which federal MP spends the most on Facebook advertising?</p>
<p>If you guessed Prime Minister Scott Morrison or Labor leader Anthony Albanese — or even headline-grabbing backbenchers Craig Kelly or Andrew Laming — you would be wrong. Way off, in fact.</p>
<p>No, the biggest spender on Facebook advertising — for the 90 day period between 20 June to 17 September 2021 — was deputy Labor leader, Richard Marles.</p>
<p>As recent scandals around the 2016 US presidential elections and the Brexit vote show, knowing how those in the political sphere spend their advertising dollars is key to maintaining trust and integrity in our political system. This has never been more important in an age where political messages can be targeted to particular audiences with laser-like precision. </p>
<h2>Facebook’s Ad Library</h2>
<p>I got the data for my study from <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/report/?country=AU&campaign_tracker_time_preset=last_90_days&source=spend-tracker-link&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B0%5D=101546263223119&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B1%5D=145262132264710&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B2%5D=835063023304246&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B3%5D=537762462924537&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B4%5D=191161174381418&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B5%5D=1510561608994505&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B6%5D=132800873768451&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B7%5D=150255771679533&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B8%5D=306388116536794&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B9%5D=150300238338551&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B10%5D=344957748946908&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B11%5D=1476193982599877&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B12%5D=423722634317667&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B13%5D=111837652330983&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B14%5D=363375540400009&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B15%5D=590682774314765&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B16%5D=186985648081724&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B17%5D=1440988909453928&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B18%5D=440809762672002&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B19%5D=565798730143075&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B20%5D=325495831575&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B21%5D=353909191473562&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B22%5D=352279091525380&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B23%5D=738620372859560&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B24%5D=101356533405538&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B25%5D=461713630554622&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B26%5D=798754616870434&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B27%5D=402408806477773&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B28%5D=130624523767632&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B29%5D=1159459864219222&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B30%5D=776811619361742&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B31%5D=2057041367767936&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B32%5D=292873364640384&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B33%5D=1670874889818772&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B34%5D=455281287849603&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B35%5D=552968198133394&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B36%5D=397307097023253&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B37%5D=111308555704741&campaign_tracker_page_ids%5B38%5D=639964416159393&campaign_tracker_">Facebook’s Ad Library</a>, a publicly accessible database of ads which are served up across Facebook, the Facebook-owned Instagram, Facebook Messenger and Facebook’s Audience Network, which is used to run ads within games and apps beyond Facebook’s platforms. The database is searchable by advertiser, location and keywords and can be filtered for issues, elections or politics.</p>
<p>Unless you specify otherwise, Facebook ads are automatically placed wherever its algorithm “decides” they should be placed. </p>
<p>Facebook <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/17/facebook-to-launch-ad-spend-trackers-for-us-senate-and-house-races.html">launched</a> its ad library in 2019. This came in the wake the 2016 US presidential election where the social network’s advertisements were used to influence the outcome. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/fact-check-us-what-is-the-impact-of-russian-interference-in-the-us-presidential-election-146711">Fact check US: What is the impact of Russian interference in the US presidential election?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The ad library launched in Australia in <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/facebook-imposes-new-transparency-rules-on-political-ads-in-australia-20200309-p54861.html">March 2020</a>. </p>
<p>By making ads on Facebook’s platforms, particularly those relating to elections and politics, accessible, the social media giant is attempting to improve transparency about who spends how much and on what issues.</p>
<h2>Hey, big spender</h2>
<p>My data analysis reveals Marles spent A$45,056 advertising on the social media site in the three months to 17 September 2021.</p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/7304778/embed" title="Interactive or visual content" class="flourish-embed-iframe" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="width:100%;height:600px;" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-forms allow-scripts allow-downloads allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<div style="width:100%!;margin-top:4px!important;text-align:right!important;"><a class="flourish-credit" href="https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/7304778/?utm_source=embed&utm_campaign=visualisation/7304778" target="_top"><img alt="Made with Flourish" src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/made_with_flourish.svg"> </a></div>
<hr>
<p>That’s more than double the next highest lower house MP advertising on Facebook, assistant defence minister Andrew Hastie. He spent $17,251 over the same period.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Deputy Labor leader Richard Marles" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422017/original/file-20210920-17-87i7g3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422017/original/file-20210920-17-87i7g3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422017/original/file-20210920-17-87i7g3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422017/original/file-20210920-17-87i7g3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422017/original/file-20210920-17-87i7g3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422017/original/file-20210920-17-87i7g3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422017/original/file-20210920-17-87i7g3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Deputy Labor leader Richard Marles tops the list of recent Facebook ad spenders in federal parliament.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The adverts run by Marles focused on campaigning against proposed changes to the National Disability Insurance Scheme, campaigning against Geelong mayor and local Liberal candidate Stephanie Asher, and advocating for a federal anti-corruption commission.</p>
<p>Morrison doesn’t even rank in the top ten Facebook advertisers in federal parliament, coming in at number 15, while Albanese is ranked 12th. Perhaps the leaders’ relatively low ranking is not surprising. If you are a leader, you have a greater platform to get your message out without having to spend up big on Facebook ads.</p>
<p>It’s impossible to say exactly what you get for this money, as your ads are effectively bidding against other advertisers seeking the same audience. The cost per 1,000 impressions varies constantly. During an election campaign, the costs is likely to go higher, but still be much cheaper than traditional newspaper and TV advertising. </p>
<h2>What about senators and premiers?</h2>
<p>The data for the past three months shows MPs in the House of Representatives are bigger spenders than their Senate colleagues. </p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/7305040/embed" title="Interactive or visual content" class="flourish-embed-iframe" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="width:100%;height:600px;" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-forms allow-scripts allow-downloads allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<div style="width:100%!;margin-top:4px!important;text-align:right!important;"><a class="flourish-credit" href="https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/7305040/?utm_source=embed&utm_campaign=visualisation/7305040" target="_top"><img alt="Made with Flourish" src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/made_with_flourish.svg"> </a></div>
<hr>
<p>In the upper house, the biggest spenders on Facebook ads over the past three months were Liberal senators Zed Seselja and Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, who spent $18,280 and $17,192 respectively. Labor senator Kristina Keneally was the third highest ad spender, dropping $16,667 on Facebook ads.</p>
<p>And the state premiers? Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews spent $13,897, well behind his South Australian counterpart Steven Marshall, who spent $34,471. </p>
<p>NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian does not come up in the Facebook Ad Library, suggesting her Facebook page is not used to buy advertisements on the platform.</p>
<h2>What information can you get?</h2>
<p>When you search the ad library, users can see summaries about how much was spent, where it was spent and the ad copy and images that were displayed to Facebook users. Facebook also gives an indication of the potential reach of each ad and the number of screens it appeared on.</p>
<p>Marles’ adverts, for example, reached a potential audience of 100,000–500,000 people. In practice, though, his <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?id=262287618996680">best-performing ad</a> in the past three months was seen by 20,000–25,000 people, while his <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?id=295844338989081">poorest performing ad</a> was seen by 1,000–2,000. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Minister for international development Zed Seselja" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422055/original/file-20210920-47670-15ipmln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422055/original/file-20210920-47670-15ipmln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422055/original/file-20210920-47670-15ipmln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422055/original/file-20210920-47670-15ipmln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422055/original/file-20210920-47670-15ipmln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422055/original/file-20210920-47670-15ipmln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422055/original/file-20210920-47670-15ipmln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Minister for international development Zed Seselja spent more than $18,000 on Facebook ads.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lukas Coch/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>You can can also search and view advertisements by political parties and organisations.</p>
<p>Here, the ALP dominates, spending $173,067 over the past three months, in comparison to the Liberal Party, which spent $23,167. Pauline Hanson’s One Nation comes in third, with a Facebook ad spend of $10,118.</p>
<p>The spending by political parties is modest compared to some non-governmental organisations. For example, Greenpeace Australia Pacific spent $327,117, ahead of Amnesty International Australia ($255,052) and the Australian Conservation Foundation ($253,260).</p>
<h2>How the ad library could be better</h2>
<p>Will Facebook’s steps toward improving transparency in public discussion and debate improve matters?</p>
<p>Perhaps, but at the moment it’s not the easiest tool to use, especially for the average user. To find out who spent the most among federal MPs requires entering the names manually. For a company that is otherwise obsessed about the user experience, the design of the ad library seems an afterthought. </p>
<p>And while you can create a link to the data, it doesn’t appear to update in real-time. The results are a snapshot of ad spend, frozen in time. This means the data is always slightly behind and users are required to enter the data anew to create a more up-to-date comparison. Facebook does have the capacity to provide real-time access to precise numbers if they so wished. </p>
<p>A bigger problem is Facebook’s system relies on individuals and organisations to self-report if an advertisement is related to social or political issues. This is <a href="https://en-gb.facebook.com/business/help/208949576550051?id=288762101909005&recommended_by=2405092116183307">required by Australian law</a>, but those seeking to affect the outcome of election may just take the chance of avoiding such scrutiny.</p>
<p>For example, last October, Clive Palmer ran an ad about border closures titled “<a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?id=745339022533823">Down with the wall!!!</a>” without a disclaimer. It was eventually removed by Facebook, but not before it had been served up in 10,000–15,000 Facebook feeds.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/after-clive-palmers-60-million-campaign-limits-on-political-advertising-are-more-important-than-ever-117099">After Clive Palmer's $60 million campaign, limits on political advertising are more important than ever</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Nevertheless, Facebook’s efforts to improve transparency around ad spending and reach is arguably more open and democratic than traditional advertising. Marles’ and other advertisers’ ad spends might raise eyebrows, but at the very least they’re being upfront about what they’re spending.</p>
<p>Perhaps it’s time we insisted all social and political advertising, both online and off, achieved similar levels of transparency.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168197/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>I currently purchase Facebook ads to promote books I have co-authored. </span></em></p>A study of Facebook’s Ad Library over the past three months, shows what federal MPs, state premiers and political parties are spending on the social media platform.Christopher Scanlon, Senior Lecturer in Communication, Deakin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1469112020-10-30T12:48:07Z2020-10-30T12:48:07ZFrom Trump to Trudeau, the escalator is a favorite symbol of political campaigns<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/364298/original/file-20201019-19-13chrxy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=123%2C82%2C2361%2C1511&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Donald Trump rides an escalator to announce his candidacy for the U.S. presidency at Trump Tower on June 16, 2015, in New York City.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/business-mogul-donald-trump-rides-an-escalator-to-a-press-news-photo/477321340?adppopup=true">Christopher Gregory/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In June 2015 Donald Trump rode an escalator into the lobby of Trump Tower in New York City to announce his candidacy for president – an escalator ride that quickly became famous.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/06/14/donald-trump-campaign-announcement-tower-escalator-oral-history-227148">Politico</a> called it “the escalator ride that changed America,” and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/13/donald-trump-presidential-campaign-speech-eyewitness-memories">The Guardian</a> spoke of “the surreal day Trump kicked off his bid for president” with a “golden escalator ride.”</p>
<p>The escalator has <a href="https://news.mit.edu/2020/urban-job-escalator-stopped-0708">long been a symbol of social mobility</a>, of the ease with which Americans have been able to <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/09/social-mobility-upwards-decline-usa-us-america-economics/">rise to the top of the social and economic hierarchy</a>. For this reason, it has featured in a range of recent political campaigns.</p>
<p>For decades the escalator has been a ready symbol in debates over economic inequality and globalization. For many it captures how the economy used to work, how it no longer seems to work and how it might work again. The escalator’s political meaning has shifted over the years – but it’s never gone away, and candidates on both the right and the left love to invoke it.</p>
<h2>Justin Trudeau’s ascension</h2>
<p><a href="https://colostate.academia.edu/PeterErickson">In my work on the cultural history of the escalator</a>, I have been struck by its persistent use in recent years. </p>
<p>During Justin Trudeau’s 2015 campaign to become prime minister of Canada, a television ad featured the candidate <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-escalator-ad-commercial-twitter-1.3212676">climbing an escalator the wrong way</a>. Trudeau remains in place until he reverses the escalator’s direction and uses it to propel himself upward. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-wYJ-xNeEe4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Campaign ad for Justin Trudeau: “Harder to Get Ahead”</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For Trudeau’s Liberal Party, the escalator served as a metaphor for how upward mobility had languished under the Conservative government of Stephen Harper. </p>
<p>The ad symbolically replaced the 18th-century economist Adam Smith’s metaphor of <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/invisible-hand">an “invisible hand”</a> – coined to describe the way that prices seem to rise and fall of their own accord in a capitalist economy – with an escalator. Trudeau’s liberal politics, his campaign promised, were like a “master switch” capable of redirecting the escalator’s flow.</p>
<p>For Trudeau’s leftist critics in the opposition New Democratic Party, though, the escalator ad <a href="https://twitter.com/ndp/status/647876755823333376">symbolized everything that was wrong with Trudeau’s politics</a>, because it asked voters to trust that globalization and <a href="https://prospect.org/economy/corporate-welfare-hurts/">corporate welfare</a> would bring wealth and social mobility. “Stop the Escalator” became <a href="https://twitter.com/ndp/status/647876755823333376">a progressive rallying cry of the 2015 campaign</a>.</p>
<p>Donald Trump’s television series “The Apprentice” was likewise obsessed with the politics of social mobility. At the end of each episode, contestants were sent <a href="https://splinternews.com/what-i-learned-about-donald-trump-from-binge-watching-t-1793854444">either “up to the suite – or down to the street.”</a> To be important is to have access to the corporate boardroom and the penthouse.</p>
<p>For Trump, riding the escalator is a symbol of social mobility and power. <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=Ye6e_VxM00kC&q=escalator#v=snippet&q=escalator&f=false">In “The Art of the Deal</a>,” Trump boasts about how expensive it was to install.</p>
<p>The fact that Trump rode down the escalator, rather than up it – as if he were condescending to come down, rather than inviting us to come up – turned the symbol on its head.</p>
<h2>Criticism of globalization</h2>
<p>The political right around the world has often targeted the escalator. The objection is precisely to its accessibility – that anyone can ride it.</p>
<p>In 2014, during the United Kingdom’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/britains-brexit-divorce-is-here-but-the-bickering-over-alimony-payments-and-who-gets-the-house-is-only-beginning-130663">Brexit referendum</a> over whether to leave the European Union, the populist U.K. Independence Party ran an advertisement depicting an escalator built over the White Cliffs of Dover. The slogan read: “No Border, No Control.”</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360330/original/file-20200928-16-1knk56d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360330/original/file-20200928-16-1knk56d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360330/original/file-20200928-16-1knk56d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360330/original/file-20200928-16-1knk56d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360330/original/file-20200928-16-1knk56d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360330/original/file-20200928-16-1knk56d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360330/original/file-20200928-16-1knk56d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Pro-Brexit Advertisement for the U.K. Independence Party (2014)</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360332/original/file-20200928-14-1igcpco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360332/original/file-20200928-14-1igcpco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360332/original/file-20200928-14-1igcpco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360332/original/file-20200928-14-1igcpco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360332/original/file-20200928-14-1igcpco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360332/original/file-20200928-14-1igcpco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360332/original/file-20200928-14-1igcpco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">UKIP Escalator Advertisement (2015)</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The word “control” here suggests not only an unprotected border, but a broader sense of social disorder, symbolized by the way that the escalator, a mechanical contraption, is depicted invading a pastoral landscape.</p>
<p>When Trump announced his presidential run after riding down the escalator into the lobby, he focused on issues of mobility and borders. He complained, infamously, that Mexico was sending America <a href="https://time.com/3923128/donald-trump-announcement-speech/">its rapists and drug dealers</a> – that the United States had entered an era in which working-class Americans were stuck in place while migrants, terrorists and drug dealers had become mobile.</p>
<p>Implicitly, Trump in 2015 questioned whether America’s engine of social mobility was working for the “right” people. </p>
<h2>Escalation versus de-escalation</h2>
<p>The escalator has shaped political rhetoric more generally. When we refer to the way a conflict escalates, we are using a metaphor that <a href="https://www.etymonline.com/word/escalate">originated with the escalator</a>.</p>
<p>The term is of incredibly recent origin. It first emerged in the 1920s as a verb for <a href="https://www.etymonline.com/word/escalate">riding an escalator</a>. And it took on its present meaning only in 1959, in the context of the Cold War.</p>
<p>To “escalate” in the context of the Cold War was to take the conflict to the next level. It was not to commit a single act of retaliation but to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_warfare_in_South_Vietnam,_1963%E2%80%931969">initiate a new sustained level of violence</a>. “Escalation theory” was <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/On_Escalation.html?id=0No5uIPpD8AC">intended to slow conflict</a>, <a href="https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691650463/escalation-and-nuclear-option">to avert an immediate turn toward nuclear war among the global superpowers</a>. </p>
<p>Since then, however, “escalation” has mostly served to rationalize never-ending, low-level forms of conflict. Violence, in this way, is ratcheted up and down, escalated and de-escalated, but it never ceases. </p>
<p>Modern American politics is characterized by unending escalation. One can cite the wars in <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/On_Escalation.html?id=0No5uIPpD8AC">Vietnam</a> and, now, <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057%2F9781137428561_3">Afghanistan</a>. There’s the <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/11/21/246602362/filibuster-vote-marks-escalation-in-d-c-s-partisan-wars">partisan rhetoric</a> and <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2019/09/13/why-political-brinkmanship-from-both-parties-could-be-ruinous-to-the-economy-stock-market-and-your-job/#56cfd3bf78a4">political brinkmanship</a> over Senate procedures and Supreme Court appointments. There’s <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Health/police-reformers-push-de-escalation-training-jury-effectiveness/story?id=71262003">police violence</a>. </p>
<p>Much of the public debate around these issues is preoccupied with finding “de-escalation” strategies – ways to slow America’s seemingly uncontrollable cycle of conflict and violence.</p>
<h2>Why escalators</h2>
<p>The escalator has become such a powerful and pervasive symbol in both politics and speech perhaps precisely because it is a machine. </p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>It operates mechanically, “on its own accord” and without human input, making it a ready symbol for undemocratic, technocratic policymaking that occurs without input from the general public.</p>
<p>Trudeau was unfazed by these associations. But the growing popularity of the escalator, as a symbol, on the political right reflects <a href="https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/the-danger-of-deconsolidation-the-democratic-disconnect/">a growing cynicism about democratic governance</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146911/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>This article was made possible by a fellowship from the Center for the Study of Origins at the University of Colorado, Boulder.</span></em></p>Candidates from both the right and the left use the escalator as a metaphor for the economic perils – and perks – of upward social mobility.Peter Erickson, Assistant Professor of German, Colorado State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1469042020-10-05T12:07:39Z2020-10-05T12:07:39ZTrump and Biden ads on Facebook and Instagram focus on rallying the base<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360567/original/file-20200929-24-egxaom.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=22%2C29%2C4897%2C3466&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Online political advertising is mostly attempting to mobilize candidates' existing supporters.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/Election2020Trump/ef88d6bdf3e845b09d2bddc2a41e83dc/photo">AP Photo/Steve Ruark</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The campaigns of Donald Trump and Joe Biden together spent US$86 million on social media advertising between June 1 and Sept. 13, according to Syracuse University’s <a href="https://illuminating.ischool.syr.edu/campaign_2020/">Illuminating 2020 project</a>. The project, which I am part of, tracks the spending and the targets of Facebook and Instagram ad buys, based on data provided by the platforms.</p>
<p>About 40% of that spending came between Aug. 10 and Sept. 13, when the campaigns spent a combined $41 million online. Overall, this is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0894439317726751">roughly double the spending rate</a> as Trump and Hillary Clinton had during the same time period in 2016.</p>
<p>With these ads, which amount to about 40% of both campaigns’ spending, the candidates are trying to mobilize voters – find supporters and then spark them to get involved. </p>
<p><iframe id="JZ42w" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/JZ42w/4/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Other spending</h2>
<p>About 60% of the campaigns’ spending is aimed at persuading voters – changing hearts and minds or solidifying support among the base. Over the same Aug. 10 to Sept. 4 period, <a href="https://mediaproject.wesleyan.edu/releases-090920/">Biden and Trump spent a combined $60 million</a> on television ads, according to the Wesleyan Media Project. </p>
<p>It is much more expensive to run an ad on TV versus online. A prime-time broadcast television ad costs <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/302200/primetime-tv-cost-commercial-usa/">about $100,000 for 30 seconds</a>, generally reaching <a href="https://www.nielsen.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/09/2019-20-dma-ranker.pdf">hundreds of thousands of households</a>, while a social media ad costs a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/business/ads/pricing">few hundred dollars to reach tens of thousands</a> of individual users. Those are estimates – many factors affect the actual cost of both types of ads, including location, timing and target demographics, but digital ads are far cheaper than TV.</p>
<p>Print, radio and billboard ads are a tiny share – usually less than 5% of presidential advertising spending.</p>
<h2>Mobilizing the base</h2>
<p>Nearly all of Trump’s and Biden’s campaigns’ online advertising involves some sort of call to action, urging the ad’s viewers to do something – such as give money, sign a petition, answer a poll, sign up to get emails or watch the latest video ad. Those ads also <a href="https://theconversation.com/amid-pandemic-campaigning-turns-to-the-internet-137745">help the campaigns gain additional data about supporters</a>, like what issues they’re interested in and how they’re involved in their community. The campaigns use that information to develop and run ads in key states, and identify potential supporters who can become local evangelists for the campaign.</p>
<p>Between June 1 and Sept. 13, Trump spent $34.5 million, 86% of his total online spending during that period, on calls to action in the text of the ad. In that same period, Biden’s calls to action cost $25.2 million, or 67% of his online ad spending.</p>
<p><iframe id="HL7Sw" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/HL7Sw/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>State-level spending</h2>
<p>The candidates targeted much of their spending – about one-third of Trump’s and more than half of Biden’s – in a few key states. </p>
<p>Both candidates spent heavily in Florida, California and Pennsylvania, because that’s where the largest populations are. Biden also focused on New York and Michigan; Trump also focused on Texas and Ohio.</p>
<p>These are not necessarily battleground states, but instead places where the candidates have strong bases of support. These supporters are potential campaign volunteers and sources of money for more ads.</p>
<p><iframe id="fpsQm" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/fpsQm/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Demographic differences</h2>
<p>Campaigns target their Facebook ads based on party affiliation, gender and age. Trump’s campaign targets men and women at roughly the same rate, but Biden’s campaign targets women at roughly 3 to 2 – for every $2 they spend on men, they spend $3 on women. Biden’s spending reflects the Democratic Party’s gender dynamics. Women are <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/18/men-and-women-in-the-u-s-continue-to-differ-in-voter-turnout-rate-party-identification/">more likely to identify as Democrat</a> than Republican.</p>
<p>Trump’s campaign ad spending skews older than Biden’s. Trump spends the largest share of his Facebook ad dollars on people who are 55 or older. Biden’s campaign spends the most money on the age 35-44 demographic. Both campaigns spent less targeting people between 18 and 24, probably because <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-so-few-young-americans-vote-132649">young people are less likely to turn out to vote</a> than their elders. </p>
<p><iframe id="45lRJ" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/45lRJ/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>As the last month of the campaign begins, the candidates will make their final ad purchases. Expect to see online ads continue to run in the states where each campaign has been focusing, calling on supporters to give, act, tell friends and show their support as Election Day nears.</p>
<p><em>Editor’s note: This article has been updated to correct the Biden campaign’s spending figures, which were inaccurate due to a <a href="https://news.illuminating.ischool.syr.edu/2020/10/27/data-problems-and-updates-to-the-website/">data collection error</a>.</em></p>
<p>[<em>The Conversation’s Politics + Society editors pick need-to-know stories.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/politics-weekly-74/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=politics-need-to-know">Sign up for Politics Weekly</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146904/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jennifer Stromer-Galley receives funding from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. </span></em></p>So far, Trump and Biden are spending money on Facebook and Instagram at roughly the same rate as Trump and Hillary Clinton did during 2016.Jennifer Stromer-Galley, Professor of Information Studies, Syracuse UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1444862020-09-30T18:29:03Z2020-09-30T18:29:03ZClick, like, share, vote: who’s spending and who’s winning on social media ahead of New Zealand’s election<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360653/original/file-20200930-22-vz8nd6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=13%2C0%2C3081%2C2068&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">GettyImages</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>If social media engagement rates determined which parties form the next government, New Zealand’s parliament would soon look a lot different.</p>
<p>With its daily social media interactions commanding an average 7.7% engagement rate, Advance NZ (incorporating the NZ Public Party) would be streets ahead of Labour and National.</p>
<p>Opposing the <a href="http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2020/0012/latest/LMS344134.html">COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020</a>, 5G and the United Nations, and promoting anti-lockdown protests, might only get them to <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/426670/colmar-brunton-poll-labour-at-48-percent-national-at-31-percent">1% in opinion polls</a> — but it is a winning formula online.</p>
<p>Advance NZ’s livestreamed anti-lockdown march in August netted 255,600 views — 86% of them generated by only 4,793 people who shared the posted video. </p>
<p>That’s a higher engagement rate than many posts by the acknowledged Facebook champion of New Zealand politics, the prime minister and Labour leader, Jacinda Ardern, whose own posts routinely attract between 120,000 and 500,000 views.</p>
<h2>Politics in the attention economy</h2>
<p>Across the political spectrum, parties have seen the greatest boost in visibility when they post about hot-button issues: taxation, lockdowns, economic stress, mask wearing — even tobacco prices.</p>
<p>A photo meme of New Zealand First leader Winston Peters <a href="https://www.facebook.com/NZFirst/photos/a.654807404574852/3228373067218260/?type=3">pledging to remove tobacco excise tax</a> was among the highest-performing posts, gaining 24 times the party’s usual number of comments, likes, shares and views. </p>
<p>The platform algorithms reward posts that outperform a party page’s usual engagement rates. In a kind of snowball effect, high-performing posts are pushed higher into news feeds and deeper into the minds of voters.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-facebook-prime-minister-how-jacinda-ardern-became-new-zealands-most-successful-political-influencer-144485">The Facebook prime minister: how Jacinda Ardern became New Zealand's most successful political influencer</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Social media algorithms are <a href="https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/6298">proprietary</a> and tweaked often. But their purpose is clear — to read the user’s <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/asi.21662?casa_token=Aowa7-3tFgMAAAAA:ND30I8N71slPyflK1LUFtHfc4bqm4HSDhL_QHTfbfEgeQJva6TTav80KFDyA5OQhoHzy6Bg_PIEuZg">searches and interactions</a> in order to <a href="https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/2702123.2702274?casa_token=_tZ5DGmkXXsAAAAA:38oTyR0RO9gvQBS9Bs_Mb9hCMg13wCEsxQZNW52mUHfnX8ugaKDS7yQ8ILSLajlS7_uX-erUtRw">serve them</a> more related content and keep them continually engaged.</p>
<p>With this persuasive power <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/09/movies/the-social-dilemma-review.html">built into the technology</a> and our attention now a commodity to be bought and sold, no politician can ignore social media nowadays.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360695/original/file-20200930-24-1jevrx2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360695/original/file-20200930-24-1jevrx2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=696&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360695/original/file-20200930-24-1jevrx2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=696&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360695/original/file-20200930-24-1jevrx2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=696&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360695/original/file-20200930-24-1jevrx2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=875&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360695/original/file-20200930-24-1jevrx2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=875&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360695/original/file-20200930-24-1jevrx2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=875&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author provided/The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Organic vs paid media</h2>
<p>In New Zealand from July to September 25, there were <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/report">9,537 paid advertisements</a> on Facebook and Instagram related to social issues, elections and politics, costing a total of $NZ 1,054,713. </p>
<p>Parties are particularly <a href="https://hbr.org/2015/10/when-people-pay-attention-to-video-ads-and-why">paying for attention</a> when their content has limited organic reach. </p>
<p>Labour and Jacinda Ardern have the greatest organic reach, with 1.6 million Facebook fans combined (the lion’s share being Ardern’s). The party <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=NZ&view_all_page_id=337477311451">spent only $41,396</a> on posts in one 30-day period ending in September. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-need-a-code-to-protect-our-online-privacy-and-wipe-out-dark-patterns-in-digital-design-145622">We need a code to protect our online privacy and wipe out 'dark patterns' in digital design</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>By contrast, National and its leader Judith Collins lack organic reach. With only 180,000 fans across their Facebook pages, they need to spend to keep up — <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=NZ&view_all_page_id=183355881680015">$143,825</a> in the same 30-day period. </p>
<p>Of that, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=NZ&view_all_page_id=559020010842423">$35,000</a> was devoted to a massive push for people seeing Collins’ social media advertisements to “like my page to stay up to date”. Ultimately, the strategy is about boosting party votes and building greater organic reach in future.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360961/original/file-20200930-14-gl5vms.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360961/original/file-20200930-14-gl5vms.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=831&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360961/original/file-20200930-14-gl5vms.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=831&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360961/original/file-20200930-14-gl5vms.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=831&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360961/original/file-20200930-14-gl5vms.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1044&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360961/original/file-20200930-14-gl5vms.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1044&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360961/original/file-20200930-14-gl5vms.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1044&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author provided/The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Reach and reinforcement</h2>
<p>But even smaller parties have outspent Labour. The Greens paid <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=NZ&view_all_page_id=10779081371">$82,000</a> for social advertising in the same period.</p>
<p>However, Greens Auckland Central candidate Chloe Swarbrick (who has a bigger social following than party co-leaders James Shaw or Marama Davidson) went organically viral with a simple photo of herself wearing a vintage party jumper. </p>
<p>Replica garments were rushed into production and <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/fashion/122578671/the-story-behind-green-mp-chle-swarbricks-iconic-sweatshirt">sold out</a> overnight on the party’s fundraising site. </p>
<p>So, social media do work, as ACT and its leader, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=NZ&view_all_page_id=154331724631584">David Seymour</a>, would no doubt also attest. Having <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=NZ&view_all_page_id=92043134118">spent $78,000</a> to promote their “Change your future” bus tour and “Holding the other parties accountable” message, the party is <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12367010">climbing in the polls</a>. </p>
<p>And despite its organic strength, Advance NZ has spent nearly <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=NZ&view_all_page_id=106125474475801">$7,000</a> on social media. Half of that was dedicated to boosting numbers at the anti-lockdown protests, but such spending is also clearly designed to reach voters who aren’t already fans or friends of fans.</p>
<h2>Cultivating reality</h2>
<p>The benign view is that social channels allow parties to stay in the conversations and thoughts of voters. Voters in return become more connected to politicians and informed on the issues they care about. </p>
<p>But because of the way those algorithms work, voters may rarely <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15377857.2014.959690?casa_token=IDCfSWNX8xMAAAAA:InoFgKtBEGlYVZsqb8IkpmnK5CN37fgDqKdOmxtvYTAmz1Cuntr2JIEV1xh4blbcq5vuNtKgstU">see the other side</a> of policies and issues. Instead, those first clicks, views and interactions lead down the <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90491131/the-new-york-times-new-podcast-rabbit-hole-sends-you-down-one-to-see-what-the-internet-does-to-us">rabbit hole</a> and create filter bubbles. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/with-the-election-campaign-underway-can-the-law-protect-voters-from-fake-news-and-conspiracy-theories-146095">With the election campaign underway, can the law protect voters from fake news and conspiracy theories?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Filter bubbles have been blamed for slowly polarising audiences, causing <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com.au/facebook-google-mark-zuckerberg-behavior-modification-empires-2018-4?r=US&IR=T">gradual changes</a> in voter behaviour and perception. This is a vastly different political sphere than existed even five years ago.</p>
<p>For example, anyone following only certain politicians might not have known that several social posts misrepresenting Ardern’s comments about farming in the first TV leaders’ debate had been subsequently <a href="https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/2020/08/election-2020-the-whole-truth/#/1193324691/national-mps-are-twisting-jacinda-ardern-s-words-on-social-media">fact-checked and debunked</a>.</p>
<p>Over time, the filter bubble <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11747-019-00695-1">makes room</a> for fake news to churn inside these echo chambers where users often <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/114/23/5976.short">fail to fact-check content</a>. Misinformation thrives on <a href="https://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2017/08/gut-truth">repetition and familiarity</a>.</p>
<p>But is there evidence that digital messaging influences voting behaviour? Yes, according to at least <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11421">one major US study</a>, especially when shared with friends and family. Such forms of social transmission seem more effective than politicians’ own use of social media. </p>
<p>If attitudes cultivated online translate into real-world voting behaviour, then Advance NZ may be merely a forerunner of what’s to come in New Zealand.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Correction: this story was updated to correct an error in the graph displaying party leaders’ social media statistics. The original version named Gareth Morgan as TOP leader. Geoff Simmons is the current leader.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/144486/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Organic appeal and reach still trump advertising spending when it comes to digital engagement by parties and individual politicians.Sommer Kapitan, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, Auckland University of TechnologyPatrick van Esch, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, AUT Business School, Auckland University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1403042020-08-27T15:48:39Z2020-08-27T15:48:39ZHow political attack adverts can backfire<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/353897/original/file-20200820-14-n9g5or.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=31%2C2%2C1864%2C946&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">'What happened to Joe Biden?' A 2020 Trump campaign attack advert. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYZvj7uUsgw&feature=youtu.be">Donald J Trump/YouTube</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A wave of political adverts is beginning to flood the American media as the November presidential election approaches. A major theme will be attack adverts in which one candidate will highlight the shortcomings of their opponent. Recent attack ads by President Donald Trump have <a href="https://www.axios.com/trump-biden-ad-mental-fitness-92e5aa42-d742-4b16-910a-f3d948e019c8.html">focused on the mental fitness</a> of his Democratic challenger for the White House, Joe Biden. </p>
<p>Such attack adverts, while firmly established as part of the US political landscape, have been <a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/30/volume-of-negative-political-ads-increased-in-2018/">increasing in volume</a> in recent years. But our research suggests that they can backfire. We found that unsubstantiated negative attacks can arouse curiosity among viewers, in some cases leading them to draw the opposite conclusion to what the advertiser intended.</p>
<h2>Obamacare attacks</h2>
<p>The first part of our <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0228185">recent study</a> examined the effects of adverts run by Republican candidates during the 2014 midterm elections, which attacked President Barack Obama’s flagship healthcare policy. </p>
<p>Opposing the Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly known as Obamacare, was a major political stance of the Republican Party in the 2014 midterm elections. Almost all Republican candidates made an effort to garner support from their base by attacking Obamacare and promising to repeal it if elected. </p>
<p>In the first part of our study, we analysed every political advert run through the 2014 midterms by all candidates for the US House of Representatives and Senate. Overall, anti-ACA adverts were aired five times more than the pro-ACA adverts. The negative adverts constituted a major part of the Republican campaigns: 36% of all the adverts aired by Republicans attacked the healthcare act. Meanwhile, Democrats distanced themselves from the issue and only 7.5% of all adverts they aired were about ACA. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N-GF-XDVIM">ACA attack adverts</a> were more rhetorical than substantive, neither mentioning the details of the act nor providing any relatable reasons for their attack on the law. A notable example was the “creepy Uncle Sam” attack adverts in which ACA was <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/09/creepy-anti-obamacare-ads-suggest-where-uncle-sam-wants-to-stick-it/279825/">portrayed as a negative development</a> without providing much evidence. The producers of the adverts we studied appeared to assume that the public already agreed ACA was inherently bad, and so felt no need to present viewers with more arguments against it. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CxDg7Qh0xwU?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Curiosity boost</h2>
<p>In the second part of our study, we ran an experiment in which 50 random people from across the political spectrum were exposed to negative attack adverts about ACA, 50 to positive adverts about ACA, and another 50 were not shown any adverts. When we subsequently presented the three groups with information about four policy issues, including ACA, we found those who had seen the negative attack adverts about the healthcare act were more likely to seek further information about it than the other two groups. While we found that positive adverts also increased curiosity in comparison to no adverts, their effect was less than that of negative adverts.</p>
<p>Since the only difference between the three groups was the type of advertisement they were exposed to, we attributed the difference in their level of curiosity to the type of advertisement they watched. We confirmed that viewers’ curiosity was triggered by exposure to negative information in attack adverts, which don’t provide clear reasons behind the attack.</p>
<p>The underlying theory behind this is the US psychologist George Lowenstein’s “<a href="https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/sds/docs/loewenstein/PsychofCuriosity.pdf">information gap theory</a>”, which suggests that when there is a discrepancy between what we know and what we want to know, we seek out more information to fill that gap. Republican candidates attacked ACA in their political advertisements without providing adequate information on why they oppose the act. Such advertisements, bereft of information relevant to voters, actually sparked a curiosity to learn more. </p>
<p>It’s not just adverts about ACA that backfire. We also tested these results with a different group of 150 people who were shown attack adverts against the Common Core educational standards. Common Core is a set of standards detailing the level students throughout the US should reach in English and mathematics at each school grade. </p>
<p>In one attack advert, implementation of Common Core education standards <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2_NPN2eI6E">was described as a</a> “disaster”. We found a very similar pattern, consistent with the ACA attack adverts, arousing more curiosity from viewers which led them to want to gather more knowledge about Common Core. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/j2_NPN2eI6E?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Not always good publicity</h2>
<p>Our experiment also suggested that an increase in anti-ACA adverts could actually lead to an increase in enrolments in the healthcare scheme. In our data, the average number of anti-ACA adverts in a state ahead of the 2014 midterms was 5,877 and 22.3% of eligible people signed up to ACA during the enrolment period between November 2014 and February 2015. Our statistical analysis indicates that if the number of anti-ACA adverts in an average state was to increase by 1,000 to 6,877, then the enrollment in ACA in a state could increase by 4% to 26.3% in the next enrolment period.</p>
<p>The coronavirus pandemic adds a new layer of complexity to political campaigns in 2020. With election rallies, town hall meetings and public debates out of bounds for most politicians, there’s likely to be an unprecedented amount of political advertising and outreach efforts on social media and television. Now, more than ever, it’s important for candidates to develop online strategies to reach and connect with the electorate with effective political advertisements.</p>
<p>Our work offers a cautionary note to this current hyper-partisan environment. The old adage “any publicity is good publicity” needs to be replaced with “any publicity is good publicity, but not necessarily for you”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/140304/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Negative political advertising can actually spark more curiosity about a policy issue.Ram Gopal, Professor of Information Systems Management, Warwick Business School, University of WarwickNiam Yaraghi, Assistant Professor of Business Technology, Miami Herbert Business School, University of MiamiLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1377452020-05-13T12:39:36Z2020-05-13T12:39:36ZAmid pandemic, campaigning turns to the internet<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/334131/original/file-20200511-49579-rrao36.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=20%2C14%2C1598%2C741&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Joe Biden's basement bookshelf has become a familiar background for his campaign videos.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/in-this-screengrab-from-joebiden-com-democratic-news-photo/1209520025">Photo by JoeBiden.com via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>This feels like it could be the most revolutionary moment in U.S. campaign history: Candidates are robbed of the typical ways for <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/15/us/politics/coronavirus-2020-campaign-events.html">connecting with supporters</a> and changing the hearts and minds of the voting public.</p>
<p>The coronavirus has ground the presidential campaigns of Joe Biden and Donald Trump to a near halt. <a href="https://www.theweek.com/speedreads/913484/trump-might-hold-2020-rallies-drivein-theaters">Public rallies aren’t happening</a>, and to follow social distancing guidelines, many of the campaigns’ local offices have <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/thousands-of-candidates-reinventing-politics-on-the-fly-for-the-age-of-pandemic/2020/04/25/99d22368-863b-11ea-ae26-989cfce1c7c7_story.html">stopped bringing in volunteers</a> for phone banking or knocking on doors in local neighborhoods.</p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=MlESf7IAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">I</a> have studied presidential campaigning since the 1996 election. In my book, <a href="https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199731930.001.0001/acprof-9780199731930">“Presidential Campaigning in the Internet Age</a>,” I document the ways that campaigns have evolved their campaign tactics to incorporate digital media. </p>
<p>For many years, political operatives have been perfecting their use of the internet’s vast array of social media platforms, websites and digital tools. They’ve identified effective strategies of digital communication with supporters and the press. </p>
<p>Now that traditional in-person campaigning has been severely limited, I believe campaigns will lean heavily on that digital experience, focusing in three areas: social media, campaign-specific mobile apps and paid advertising on social media. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="InstagramEmbed" data-react-props="{"url":"https://www.instagram.com/p/CABksQ8AT6s","accessToken":"127105130696839|b4b75090c9688d81dfd245afe6052f20"}"></div></p>
<figure><figcaption><span class="caption">A recent post from President Donald Trump’s Instagram account.</span></figcaption></figure>
<h2>An initial slowdown</h2>
<p>In general, political campaigns group voters into three categories: <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/hacking-the-electorate/C0D269F47449B042767A51EC512DD82E">supporters, opponents and a group in the middle</a>, sometimes called “persuadables,” who don’t have a strong connection to a political party or who aren’t that into politics. The members of this third group could be persuaded to vote for the candidate on Election Day.</p>
<p>The key function of a campaign is to identify supporters and mobilize them to be the workhorses for the cause: give money, volunteer, promote the candidate and – of course – vote. Campaigns also need to find and communicate to the persuadables, in hopes of getting their backing. And campaigns need to identify those who oppose their candidates, so they don’t waste time and money getting them to vote, which would only help the other side.</p>
<h2>Regrouping before the conventions</h2>
<p>There are natural slowdowns and lulls in the campaign season, including when the presumptive nominees are settled on, but before the party conventions make the nominations official – like now. </p>
<p>During these periods, the candidates reduce their activities aimed at the persuadables, like running TV ads. Instead, they reorganize their campaigns to complete the primary phase, and set up staffing and strategy for the general election.</p>
<p>During this time, the campaigns continue to engage with their supporters in hopes of amassing a large war chest and an army of volunteers to take on the opponent.</p>
<p>Campaigns also use this lull to expand their databases. <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/23723484?seq=1">Data about the public is as vital as money</a>. It’s not enough to know a supporter’s name and address: Understanding their likes, habits, political behavior and even psychological predispositions can give a deeper picture, letting campaigns identify people with similar characteristics as potential supporters. </p>
<p>That’s what the now-reviled campaign data analysis firm <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-cambridge-analyticas-facebook-targeting-model-really-worked-according-to-the-person-who-built-it-94078">Cambridge Analytica</a> <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/03/20/595338116/what-did-cambridge-analytica-do-during-the-2016-election">promised to do</a>. </p>
<p>Similarly, characterizing persuadables and opponents can help campaigns target their efforts efficiently. The Trump campaign identified opponents to his campaign to <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-27/inside-the-trump-bunker-with-12-days-to-go">target them with ads meant to discourage them from voting</a>.</p>
<p>For the next few months, here are three things to watch.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1257795708339421186"}"></div></p>
<h2>Social media</h2>
<p>As I explain in my book, since 1996 the Democratic and Republican party machines have been honing their strategies of communicating through digital media. They use Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Snapchat alongside YouTube, email and websites in an integrated communications system. </p>
<p>Even though the digital platforms allow easy two-way communication on blogs, forums and social media, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02865.x">that’s not what the campaigns are looking for</a>. They don’t want long, drawn-out policy debates on their pages. Instead, they want to use interactive elements of the internet to convert supporters and get them to give up data about themselves.</p>
<p>The social media accounts are the workhorses to cultivate supporters and draw them to the campaign’s website, which is home base. That’s where campaigns can <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/05/11/coronavirus-keeps-joe-biden-home-2020-campaign-rolls/5177329002/">deliver their most direct messages</a> and collect that valuable data about their supporters.</p>
<p>The campaigns use a tactic I call “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02865.x">controlled interactivity</a>” on social media to entice followers to share information about themselves. On the campaigns’ official feeds, they post polls, hawk merchandise and push an endless stream of requests to sign up for email or to give money. Anytime someone interacts with one of those posts, the campaign gets a little bit more data. For example, Trump’s Facebook page features posts about his virtual events with “Team Trump.” A click on the “join” link goes to the campaign website, where visitors are asked to give up their personal information: name, address, phone number and email address. When they do, the campaign just got a new supporter to target.</p>
<h2>Mobile apps</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/334133/original/file-20200511-31175-ibibx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/334133/original/file-20200511-31175-ibibx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/334133/original/file-20200511-31175-ibibx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1067&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/334133/original/file-20200511-31175-ibibx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1067&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/334133/original/file-20200511-31175-ibibx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1067&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/334133/original/file-20200511-31175-ibibx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1340&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/334133/original/file-20200511-31175-ibibx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1340&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/334133/original/file-20200511-31175-ibibx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1340&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Trump campaign has an app encouraging supporters to join the effort.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.donaldjtrump.com/app/">Official Trump 2020 App</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Both <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-team-launches-new-app-allowing-supporters-to-engage-with-the-campaign-from-their-couch">Trump</a> and <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-campaign-ramps-up-digital-game-as-election-goes-virtual">Biden</a> have launched mobile applications for iOS and Android devices. It’s worth their campaigns’ money and effort because it can keep supporters energized, and collect more data. </p>
<p>Only supporters – and perhaps curious reporters and opponents’ campaign staff – will download and seriously use the app. Once downloaded, its function is to make supporters feel like an insider by giving them news and “inside looks” at the campaign, tools to donate money and opportunities to become local organizers. Trump’s app encourages users to “Become a Trump Team Leader” by registering voters and knocking on doors in their community.</p>
<p>Most of these political apps are also designed to help grow campaigns’ voter contact lists. Not only do they collect the user’s own contact information but they often seek to access the phone’s entire contact list. These apps may also <a href="https://ourdataourselves.tacticaltech.org/posts/campaign-apps">want access</a> to photos, the user’s social media accounts and location information.</p>
<p>All of this data gives campaigns more extensive pictures of who their most ardent supporters are. That helps them target others with similar characteristics, to bring them into the campaign fold.</p>
<h2>Paid ads</h2>
<p>On television, most ads target persuadables in an effort to influence how they think about the candidates. That’s because television ads do not allow for the degree of fine-grained or micro-targeted advertising that digital media ads provide. </p>
<p>TV ads blanket whole regions, while social media ads pinpoint-target specific people based on the desirable traits that the campaign is after – typically people who look like supporters. This is where all that data comes in. Social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram and Google allow advertisers to create “<a href="https://www.facebook.com/business/help/465262276878947?id=401668390442328">look-alike</a>” campaigns, where the advertiser feeds the social media company the names and email addresses of known supporters. Then the company’s proprietary algorithms find the email addresses that match, analyze the known Facebook profiles for their interests and behaviors and then <a href="https://blog.hootsuite.com/facebook-lookalike-audiences/">find other users with similar likes, interests and behaviors</a>. </p>
<p>Those people get targeted with ads; if they click on the poll or buy a hat that’s advertised, the campaign grows its support base while also improving its data about who is likely to respond positively to future ads. Political watchers have even speculated that <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/04/how-facebooks-ad-technology-helps-trump-win/606403/">this technique helped Trump win in 2016</a>.</p>
<p>With the conventions now postponed to the end of the summer, Trump and Biden have more time to grow their databases, their financial war chests and their supporter bases. </p>
<p>Although it may seem an unprecedented campaign season that the candidates were ill-equipped for, the truth is that digital campaigning has been well-honed over six election seasons. They just need to do more online than they had planned for.</p>
<p>[<em>Insight, in your inbox each day.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=insight">You can get it with The Conversation’s email newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/137745/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jennifer Stromer-Galley receives funding from The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. </span></em></p>For many years, political operatives have been perfecting their use of the internet’s vast array of social media platforms, websites and digital tools.Jennifer Stromer-Galley, Professor of Information Studies, Syracuse UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1283262019-12-05T15:31:02Z2019-12-05T15:31:02ZUK election 2019: dirty tricks wrong-footing a media that now faces a fight to remain relevant<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/305413/original/file-20191205-39001-1nspme7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=9%2C3%2C2035%2C1529&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Cynicism (with a tinge of humour) on the rise in the 2019 UK general election.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Burger King</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The UK’s 2019 general election is already being talked of as one of the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/29/opinion/britain-election-disinformation-johnson.html">dirtiest on record</a> and one which has broken traditional media’s hold on political campaigns. Broadcasters have been wrong-footed and newspapers strangely marginalised as the fight has been <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-election-2019-video-the-big-battleground-as-main-parties-go-head-to-head-for-hearts-and-minds-127351">taken to social media</a> and populist buttons pressed wherever they can be found. And voters are weary.</p>
<p>As Peter Geoghegan and Mary Fitzgerald of <a href="https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/">OpenDemocracy</a> <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/29/opinion/britain-election-disinformation-johnson.html">wrote in the New York Times</a> recently:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Pity British voters because they are being subjected to a barrage of distortion, dissembling and disinformation without precedent in the country’s history. Long sentimentalised as the home of ‘fair play’, Britain is now host to the virus of lies, deception and digital skulduggery that afflicts many other countries in the world. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yet, as with technology, <a href="http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/amaras-law/">Amara’s law</a> may apply: the impact of this campaign may be overestimated in the short term and underestimated in the long term. The list of offences has been <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-election-2019-conspiracy-or-cock-up-the-digital-dirty-tricks-marring-this-campaign-127847">well documented</a> – but so far there seems to be little political price to pay.</p>
<p>The Conservatives <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-50482637">rebranded their Twitter account</a> to look like an independent fact checking account during a leaders’ debate, tried to “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/01/google-jacking-to-dead-squirrels-online-tricks-of-electioneering-general-election-">Google-jack</a>” the Labour Party’s manifesto launch with a fake news site. They <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAoreomYfQM">edited a video</a> of Labour’s Keir Starmer to look as if he couldn’t answer a question and doctored another to <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/facebook-advert-ban-conservative-party-deleted-bbc-huw-edwards-a9228781.html">look as if senior BBC journalists agreed</a> with their policies.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1196924702540869632"}"></div></p>
<p>Meanwhile they reneged on talks for <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-andrew-neil-interview-bbc-general-election-corbyn-a9232191.html">Boris Johnson to be interviewed</a> by the BBC’s Andrew Neil (as one Tory <a href="https://twitter.com/adamboultonSKY/status/1199744818030792705?s=20">apparently briefed journalists</a>: “Better to take the hit for being chicken than undergo that” and refused to appear on <a href="https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/ofcom-rejects-tory-complaint-over-channel-4-news-climate-debate-with-stand-in-ice-sculptures/">Channel 4’s climate debate</a> – instead sending Michael Gove and Johnson’s father Stanley as surrogates.</p>
<p>The Liberal Democrats have been criticised for including <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/16/lib-dems-criticised-for-selective-use-of-polling-data-on-leaflets">misleading bar charts</a> in campaign literature which overstated their position as well as distributing campaign literature designed to <a href="https://twitter.com/journokatie/status/1199345018244218883?s=20">deliberately look like independent local newspapers</a>. They have also had to <a href="https://www.channel4.com/news/senior-lib-dem-staffer-suspended-after-alleged-forgery-of-email-to-journalist">discipline a staff member</a> for faking an email in order to quash a news story they had branded “irresponsible”.</p>
<p>Labour has been less obviously mischievous, but Jeremy Corbyn brandished alleged trade documents that had been <a href="https://www.wired.co.uk/article/labour-nhs-documents-trump-us-trade-deal-brexit">lurking online for weeks</a> as “leaked proof the Tories want to sell the NHS” and <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1209903/Jeremy-Corbyn-latest-labour-party-news-general-election-2019-barry-Gardiner">refusing to answer questions</a> on topics not of their choosing.</p>
<h2>Tory ‘young Turks’</h2>
<p>The Conservatives brought in a young <a href="https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/election-2019/2019/12/isaac-levido-and-meme-machine">digital team under Isaac Levido</a>, an Australian political campaigner, to use the tactics that worked for Scott Morrison in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/federal-election-2019-63027">Australian election</a> earlier this year. Working from what’s apparently called “the pod of power” in Conservative Central Office, they produce <a href="https://open.spotify.com/episode/3ybf1Ieguz6pvTohQBllae">rapid raw social media content</a>, designed to shock people, arouse emotion, unlock anger, excitement and fear in what’s called the “battle of the thumbs” – a reference to the importance of smartphones and sharing online content. </p>
<p>Perhaps, with <a href="https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/trust-politicians-falls-sending-them-spiralling-back-bottom-ipsos-mori-veracity-index">public trust in politicians collapsing</a>, they feel they have nothing to lose. But at the heart of these tactics is a cynical view of the public which cannot sustain a healthy political base in the long term. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, trying to find a legitimate middle ground in a polarised world where you are “either for us or against us”, appears to be a mug’s game for the broadcasters – which are regulated to be <a href="https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/section-five-due-impartiality-accuracy">impartial and accurate</a>. The politically committed – who can regard any scrutiny as partisan – aren’t interested in definitions of impartiality. Many would argue it is now irrelevant – hence the <a href="https://www.publicmediaalliance.org/the-bbc-and-the-uk-election/">complaints about false balance</a> and public calls for broadcasters to “call out the truth” rather than just present competing arguments. And the BBC has wobbled with some <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/helpandfeedback/corrections_clarifications/">minor editorial errors</a> which have been reluctantly acknowledged and jumped on by those searching for signs of bias. </p>
<p>Channel 4 has taken a belligerent stance, with its head of news and current affairs, Dorothy Byrne, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/sep/18/dorothy-byrne-on-calling-boris-johnson-a-liar-nobody-has-said-that-isnt-true">calling Boris Johnson a “known liar”</a> at the Edinburgh TV Festival in the summer. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uapRPowoQZM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The broadcaster also took an <a href="https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/28/channel-4-will-replace-boris-johnson-ice-sculpture-climate-debate-11235550/">unflinching approach to “empty chairing”</a> the prime minister when he turned down a place at their climate debate. </p>
<p>In return the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/28/ice-sculpture-to-replace-boris-johnson-in-channel-4-climate-debate">government made menacing noises</a> about reviewing the channel’s remit. Commendably bold by the broadcaster perhaps, but belligerence should be a last resort – as a former chair of Channel 4 used to say: “Don’t drive at a brick wall, drive round it.” </p>
<p>In contrast, the BBC having first stood firm when the prime minister decided not to submit to a forensic cross-examination at the hands of Andrew Neil (unlike other party leaders), then gave way and provided a softer seat on <a href="https://www.itv.com/news/2019-12-01/boris-johnson-to-face-andrew-marr-but-not-andrew-neil/">the Andrew Marr Sunday morning show</a> – arguing they were still trying to persuade him to do the tougher interview as well. Don’t hold your breath. It suggested vacillation at a time which called for steadfastness. </p>
<p>Broadcasters appear wrongfooted, pushed into unhelpful stances, and newspapers’ once strident voices now struggle to be heard in the online cacophony. But beneath the noise and smoke of social media, there has been plenty of good reporting. As the director of BBC News, Fran Unsworth, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/04/bbc-impartiality-precious-protect-election-coverage">wrote in The Guardian</a>, for all the criticism of the broadcaster’s coverage – some justified, much not – it has continued to provide in-depth interviews with leaders, fact checking, policy analysis and more. </p>
<p>It’s there if you look for it – and broadcasting is still <a href="https://www.bond.org.uk/news/2019/05/how-much-does-the-uk-public-trust-the-media">trusted more than print</a>. And through a storm of partisan accusations broadcasters have steered a fair course. So maybe this is all just the melee of a rancorous campaign and, afterwards, calm will return. Maybe. </p>
<h2>Storing up trouble</h2>
<p>But this is where the longer-term consequences come in. There’s no question the political parties have sought to undermine the media by pressing populist buttons and disregarding the norms of election campaigns. And our media institutions have struggled to adapt swiftly to the new tactics – to the tone and timescale of digital campaigning and unconventional and disruptive strategies. As a result, they can appear clumsy and leaden-footed.</p>
<p>The public broadcasters, like other areas of public life, have been through a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/22/public-services-face-real-terms-spending-cuts-of-up-to-40-in-decade-to-2020">difficult decade of austerity</a> funding where financial efficiency has been placed above public value. Now both the BBC and Channel 4 are likely to emerge from this election having alienated whoever wins. That’s not conducive to a strong stable broadcasting environment ready to shoulder the responsibilities we expect of public institutions. </p>
<p>The UK’s broadcast channels – including ITV, Sky and Channel 5, alongside the BBC and Channel 4 – have been a national success story, holding the country together with moments of common experience, reflecting life across all the nations of the UK. In fragmenting times with populism on the rise, that seems less achievable. Consensus is <a href="https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/rsa-blogs/2019/10/brexit-democracy-consensus">breaking down</a> and is being replaced with pervasive scepticism and cynicism. The <a href="https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/divided-britain.pdf">growing divisions</a> are not just between Remain and Leave voters, but between urban and rural communities, north and south, rich and poor, the informed and the uninformed, young and old.</p>
<p>This is partly driven by economic policy, but more by big technology. Social media has given everyone a voice – including those with little to say – and has lured the media and politicians into a populist strategy of trying to reflect the views of the masses. The big tech platforms have soaked up public attention, broken media business models, invaded our lives and sold our data. They have provided a platform for propaganda and disinformation which would not be allowed in the analogue world and placed their own profits above the public good. </p>
<p>With Artificial Intelligence developing rapidly, society’s management and understanding of the world of information is likely to fall even further behind. In spite of <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/digital-culture-media-and-sport-committee/news/fake-news-report-published-17-19/">the many calls</a> for regulation or greater media literacy education, it seems unlikely any new government will have the courage or priorities to take on Facebook and Google. </p>
<p>There is, as commentator <a href="https://hbr.org/2019/04/podcast-exponential-view">Azeem Azhar</a> has described, an accelerating gap between new technologies and institutions’ ability to respond. This is reflected in the slow responses, remote tone and a closed approach to managing crises that we see in pubic broadcasters. Although they believe they are adapting to the new digital world, the corporate culture running through them does not change. It’s still run by officers and served by infantry. </p>
<p>How might this be different for another election in five years’ time? The UK needs a more transparent approach to political campaigns. As Sky’s editor-at-large Adam Boulton <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mandatory-grillings-may-be-the-only-answer-if-our-leaders-refuse-to-be-questioned-gg0hz7wb0?shareToken=ac186c97613753e82140e82403c6c120&fbclid=IwAR0iRSK68Kgh3MdTKd4FzSkqXacj22GIQFLhNwwYdfyLpuYceQN3Zv5MZG0">reminded us last week</a> there is support for an independent commission to organise future TV debates, similar to the US <a href="https://www.debates.org/">Commission on Presidential debates</a>. This would mean the democratic imperative of aspiring leaders talking to the public was managed by an independent, transparent and formal process – no longer stitched up in locked room deals and gentlemen’s agreements. </p>
<p>And <a href="https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-we-do/changing-electoral-law/transparent-digital-campaigning">online political advertising</a> and <a href="https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&ei=jxXoXb6eO-qBhbIPkaek4Ag&q=british+political+party+funding&oq=british+political+party+funding&gs_l=psy-ab.3...21705.24456..24637...0.0..0.191.1426.18j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i7i30j0i7i10i30j0i8i7i30j0i8i7i10i30j0i13j0i13i30j0i13i5i30j0i8i13i10i30j0i333j33i10.JQEx6qWIjtI&ved=0ahUKEwj-oZCY6ZzmAhXqQEEAHZETCYwQ4dUDCAo&uact=5">party funding</a> need to be openly and transparently regulated and organised. No more foreign oligarchs paying hundreds of thousands for a dinner or <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43448559">game of tennis</a> and no more targeted Facebook ads with no requirement for truth or accuracy and no visibility beyond the targeted groups. </p>
<p>The broadcasters, always competitive, need to collaborate in managing party relations and in managing their relations with the tech behemoths. Going it alone they will be stepped over. They need far greater transparency – explaining their values and judgements, the “why” as well as the “what” of their decision making to keep the public onside. </p>
<p>And they may need to wean themselves off a secretive lobby system quoting <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/dominic-cummings-brexit-boris-johnson-anonymous-sources-spectator-a9152876.html">unattributable anonymous sources</a> with the latest scuttlebutt. Let’s throw the doors open and have on-the-record press briefings in Westminster. </p>
<p>Both politics and <a href="https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/latest/media/media-releases/2017/diversity-uk-television-industry">media need greater diversity</a>. As one senior broadcasting executive told me this week: “It’s not enough to invite them to the table – we have to hand the table over to them”, by which he meant the young and the ethnically and socially diverse.</p>
<p>But of course none of this is likely to happen swiftly. The price of political dirty tricks is low or non-existent. The lure of keeping power behind closed doors is too great. Brexit will dominate public life for at least another five years. But the <em>cynicism</em> of political lies and the <em>fear</em> of losing control by opening up the corridors of power can’t last. Either politics and institutions, including the media, adapt rapidly – with transparency, diversity and openness – or the historic social and technological changes we are experiencing will eventually break them. </p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/the-daily-newsletter-2?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKGE2019&utm_content=GEBannerB">Click here to subscribe to our newsletter if you believe this election should be all about the facts.</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/128326/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Sambrook does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The cynicism of political lies and the fear of losing control by opening up the corridors of power can’t last.Richard Sambrook, Professor of Journalism, Director of the Centre for Journalism, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1268972019-11-13T14:20:57Z2019-11-13T14:20:57ZUK election 2019: after fake Keir Starmer clip, how much of a problem are doctored videos?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/301499/original/file-20191113-77320-1z0sxm5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Keir Starmer was recently made to look stupid in a video edited by the Conservative party.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">GMB</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Conservative party <a href="https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/107937/watch-conservative-minister-apologises">created a furore</a> when it released an edited video of Labour MP Keir Starmer looking lost for words when discussing his party’s Brexit policy on ITV’s Good Morning Britain with Piers Morgan – when in fact he wasn’t lost for words in the real interview at all. BBC broadcaster, Andrew Neil <a href="https://www.thenational.scot/news/18026517.andrew-neil-fire-reposting-doctored-video-ian-blackford/">has also been chastised</a> for retweeting a doctored video on the SNP’s Ian Blackford, showing him flustered on the SNP’s record on Scottish health issues.</p>
<p>James Cleverly, the Conservative party chairman <a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/james-cleverly-defends-doctored-video-of-keir-starmer-in-fiery-exchange-with-piers-morgan-on-good-a4279796.html">defended the Starmer video release</a>, claiming it was simply edited for brevity, for easy sharing on social media and because, in his view, Starmer did not answer the question posed. So what’s the fuss? Isn’t this just the normal back and forth of electoral politics? </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1191686313461846016"}"></div></p>
<p>On the one hand, one might argue that the edited version is simply representing the opponent in their “true light”. They might actually have responded but their answer was so vague and meaningless, that they might as well have said nothing. </p>
<p>American comedian Stephen Colbert <a href="https://www.ozy.com/2016/when-stephen-colbert-spoke-truthiness-to-power/69077/">coined the term “truthiness”</a> in his political satire programme, The Colbert Report. Truthiness is a feeling that comes from the gut, rather than from the facts. Might Starmer’s manufactured silence simply represent truthiness? Are the Conservatives telling people, particularly their would-be voters, what they feel and want to hear? That Labour’s policy (in their view) is bland and incoherent.</p>
<p>The fact is that negative advertising like this is often not perceived as negative when viewed by a party’s own supporters. They display what psychologists call <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41253-019-00084-8">“confirmation bias” and motivated reasoning</a>. Because they don’t like what Starmer stands for, they are quite happy to believe he doesn’t know what he’s talking about – whether this video represents the truth or not. This kind of campaign communication is about getting existing supporters fired up and out to vote, rather than trying to change anyone’s mind.</p>
<h2>What are the limits?</h2>
<p>But the issue is: where does the doctoring of videos in electoral contests stop? What are the limits? </p>
<p>One malicious problem is that of <a href="https://theconversation.com/deepfake-videos-could-destroy-trust-in-society-heres-how-to-restore-it-110999">“deepfake” technology</a>, where highly enhanced video shows imagery that never happened but with a production quality where it is difficult to detect that the image is fake. Up until now, creating deepfakes has mostly been the <a href="https://fortune.com/2018/09/11/deep-fakes-obama-video/">preserve of cyberbullies and pornographers</a>. But the political dimension was recently highlighted in the BBC TV programme, The Capture, where a soldier is framed for a murder he didn’t commit by the intelligence services to allow them to continue using deepfake technology to frame and pursue suspected terrorists.</p>
<p>The states of <a href="https://gizmodo.com/california-bans-deepfakes-in-porn-and-politics-1838844251">California</a> and <a href="https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/politics/article/Texas-is-first-state-to-ban-political-14504294.php">Texas</a> are so worried about deepfake technology and its potential influence on elections that they have rushed through legislation to make it illegal to disseminate a malevolent deepfake about a politician within the timing of an election campaign. </p>
<p>It’s no surprise they are concerned. If videos can be made showing politicians saying and doing things they have not done, including extramarital affairs, using racist language or taking drugs, then deepfakes can result in creating public panic and moral outrage and thereby damage a politician’s chances in an election. </p>
<p>Deepfake technology has the potential to shift so-called opposition research, where political parties dig up the dirt on their opponents usually using their own statements against them, from a reactive opportunist approach to a proactive one where they make things up. Why wait for a politician to do something wrong when you can simply pay someone to doctor a video about them? Cue mayhem in their campaign.</p>
<p>What’s even more worrying is that this kind of technology might not just be used by domestic politicians against each other but might also be used by state adversaries or terrorist groups against legitimate politicians. What’s to stop Russia from using it to discredit politicians in Ukrainian elections, for example? Fake news shifts from a means to sow distrust in a society into a fully fledged weapon that could bring about regime change.</p>
<p>So there is a wider principle to this – but what do we do about it? After all, political advertising does not have to be legal, decent, honest and truthful like commercial advertising has to be. It’s <a href="https://www.euronews.com/2018/07/27/political-advertising-regulations-don-t-exist-in-the-uk-but-what-if-they-did-">not regulated</a> by a body like the Advertising Standards Authority. But, in a world of deepfakes and truthiness, perhaps it is time that political advertising was regulated? The only problem here will be getting political parties to agree to it.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/the-daily-newsletter-2?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKGE2019&utm_content=GEBannerA">Click here to subscribe to our newsletter if you believe this election should be all about the facts.</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126897/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Baines is a councillor for Anstey, Charnwood Borough Council and a member of the Conservative Party. </span></em></p>It’s a slippery slope from satire to dangerous deepfakes.Paul Baines, Professor of Political Marketing, Associate Dean (External Relations), University of LeicesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1262552019-11-05T13:10:25Z2019-11-05T13:10:25ZTwitter’s ban on political ads does change the game in one way<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299741/original/file-20191031-187912-wpagoq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Twitter has announced that it is banning paid-for political adverts, just as the UK enters a general election, saying that the reach of political messages “should be earned, not bought”.</p>
<p>The company has failed to eradicate bots, abuse and misinformation. Without action in these areas, banning political adverts is simply papering over the cracks. But the move does have one important function. Twitter has blown open the debate about political advertising and the threat it poses to the proper functioning of elections. </p>
<p>It’s easy to see why advertising on social media is an attractive prospect for political parties. Now that citizens are using platforms such as Twitter and Facebook as a <a href="http://media.digitalnewsreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/digital-news-report-2018.pdf">source of current affairs content</a>, it becomes prime real estate for advertising.</p>
<p>But just as important is the way these sites function as adverting platforms, offering parties the ability to use granular information to target users for ads. Every action you take on these platforms is collected and used to place you in advertising categories. We saw this happen in the 2016 European referendum, when the Vote Leave campaign <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/culture-media-and-sport/Fake_news_evidence/Vote-Leave-50-Million-Ads.pdf">created adverts</a> based on detailed information such as hobbies, sporting interests and even love of animals.</p>
<p>We’re gradually learning that voters can be segmented by their interests and that political parties have the ability to promote inconsistent messages according to what will play well with a particular audience. Additional concerns have been raised over the use of personal data and the <a href="https://ecpr.eu/Filestore/PaperProposal/1f23ff28-cecd-4f30-84db-666a66c9d1f9.pdf">lack of clarity</a> over who places adverts on social media and how they are funded. </p>
<h2>The UK election</h2>
<p>In the grand scheme of things, the use of Twitter advertising by UK political parties is quite limited. While the amount of money spent on <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-we-know-about-how-political-parties-use-facebook-advertising-and-what-we-dont-11721">social media ads</a> increased in the 2017 election, this was not uniform across parties or platforms. </p>
<p>In fact, the Conservative Party spent twice as much on Facebook as all the other parties combined, directing <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43487301">around £3m</a> towards the platform. Labour spent much less, choosing instead to focus on grassroots and organic tactics.</p>
<p>During the same election, <a href="http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/Search/Spending?currentPage=1&rows=10&query=Twitter&sort=DateIncurred&order=desc&tab=1&open=filter&et=pp&includeOutsideSection75=true&evt=ukparliament&ev=3568&optCols=CampaigningName&optCols=ExpenseCategoryName&optCols=FullAddress&optCols=AmountInEngland&optCols=AmountInScotland&optCols=AmountInWales&optCols=AmountInNorthernIreland&optCols=DateOfClaimForPayment&optCols=DatePaid">only £56,504 was spent placing adverts on Twitter by all parties</a>. The Conservatives spent £25,000 and the Liberal Democrats £17,177. Labour and the Co-operative parties (with which it shares an electoral alliance in some seats) spent just £6,767. So while a ban may force the Conservatives to rethink an element of their campaign strategy, it doesn’t look like Twitter was a major battleground for online ads to begin with. For most parties, the ban on political ads on Twitter will only have a minimal impact.</p>
<h2>Why the ban?</h2>
<p>While Twitter is not the focal point on the debate in political advertising, it has certainly been criticised for allowing parties to pay to have their adverts appear in users’ feeds rather than having to wait for their messages to be spread organically. </p>
<p>In his statement on banning political adverts, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey accepted that social media ads bring great power to commercial advertisers but that such power “brings significant risks to politics”. He suggested there is a moral argument, too, when he said political messages are something that should not be bought. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1189634360472829952"}"></div></p>
<p>There are, however, other forces at work in this decision. It could be argued that it is less about the morality of political adverts and more about the logistical struggles of managing their presence.</p>
<p>Twitter is yet to effectively tackle fake news and disinformation. A study by <a href="https://www.knightfoundation.org/reports/disinformation-fake-news-and-influence-campaigns-on-twitter">the Knight Foundation</a> found that more than 80% of accounts involved in spreading disinformation during the US 2016 election are still active and have yet to be detected by the platform. </p>
<p>Twitter is also behind other platforms on transparency. It has an <a href="https://ads.twitter.com/transparency">Ads Transparency Center</a>, but it’s harder to use and was failing to correctly label political adverts. This makes it less useful for transparency than Facebook’s equivalent. Indeed, the <a href="https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-19-2914_en.htm">European Commission</a>, has highlighted Twitter’s shortcomings on this point.</p>
<p>So considering that political parties don’t seem to prioritise Twitter anyway, one has to wonder if this was actually more a business decision. Would the financial investment required to build functional transparency tools and systems to detect underhand political adverts ever be recouped? Or would it just be easier to opt out of the fray?</p>
<h2>What is – and isn’t – a political ad?</h2>
<p>Of course, merely banning political adverts does not resolve the issue. Twitter has now given itself the responsibility of deciding what is, and what isn’t, a political advert.</p>
<p>Clearly adverts by politicians and parties promoting a cause or asking for votes will be banned. But Twitter has not yet provided detailed guidelines beyond this line. Is the advertising of Planned Parenthood services in the United States political, for example? Many would argue not, but those who are anti-abortion could suggest otherwise. What about <a href="https://theconversation.com/woke-washing-what-happens-when-marketing-communications-dont-match-corporate-practice-108035">commercial adverts which attempt to be “woke”</a>, such as when the food chain Iceland released an advert advocating for the ban on palm oil in its food? Does the underlying political sentiment count as a political message to Twitter? </p>
<p>It might be that we are placing too much pressure on social media sites to fix these problems. Twitter can help mitigate aggressive political discourse and fake news but should we not also consider that society should be responsible for teaching its citizens not to fall for misinformation – or teach those who seek to represent us not to spread it. </p>
<p>In the UK specifically, the Electoral Commission has asked to be granted more power to <a href="https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-we-do/changing-electoral-law/transparent-digital-campaigning">regulate</a> political spending on social media. At present, there is no law requiring political parties to disclose who paid for online advertising, even though they have to do so for printed ads. Shouldn’t this be the first port of call, rather than expecting Twitter to regulate on our behalf, as and when it sees fit?</p>
<p>So despite the issues raised by the ban of political adverts by Twitter, and the fact that it is not a solution to the social media’s more extensive problems as a space for political debate, this news will still certainly have a significant impact. It has relaunched the issue of political ads into the public consciousness before two key elections. Hopefully that will make citizens more aware of what, and why, they see in their social media feeds.</p>
<p>It also shows that it is possible to ban political adverts. It shows that concern about free speech don’t have to be such a big deal if the price is threatening other democratic principles. I think the question on the tips of all our tongues is this: will Facebook follow suit?</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300094/original/file-20191104-88372-xpdf2e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/the-daily-newsletter-2?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKGE2019&utm_content=GEBannerA">Click here to subscribe to our newsletter if you believe this election should be all about the facts.</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126255/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dr Liam Mcloughlin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Political parties don’t use Twitter anywhere near as much as Facebook. But at least someone is talking about this problem.Dr Liam Mcloughlin, PhD Researcher, Politics & Contemporary History, University of SalfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1262602019-11-01T05:23:54Z2019-11-01T05:23:54ZTwitter is banning political ads – but the real battle for democracy is with Facebook and Google<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299818/original/file-20191101-102182-1au3u3a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=22%2C26%2C2967%2C1967&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Twitter should get credit for its sensible move, but the microblogging company is tiny compared to Facebook and Google.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Finally, some good news from the weirdo-sphere that is social media. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has announced that, effective November 22, the microblogging platform will ban all political advertising – globally. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1189634360472829952"}"></div></p>
<p>This is a momentous move by Twitter. It comes when Facebook and its CEO Mark Zuckerberg are under increasing pressure to deal with the amount of mis- and disinformation published via paid political advertising on Facebook. </p>
<p>Zuckerberg recently told a congress hearing Facebook had no plans of fact-checking political ads, and he did not answer a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/live/2019/oct/23/libra-mark-zuckerberg-testifies-live-facebook-cryptocurrency-latest-updates">direct question</a> from Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez if Facebook would take down political ads found to be untrue. Not a good look. </p>
<p>A few days after Zuckerberg’s train wreck appearance before the congress committee, Twitter announced its move.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/merchants-of-misinformation-are-all-over-the-internet-but-the-real-problem-lies-with-us-123177">Merchants of misinformation are all over the internet. But the real problem lies with us</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>While Twitter should get credit for its sensible move, the microblogging company is tiny compared to Facebook and Google. So, until the two giants change, Twitter’s political ad ban will have little effect on elections around the globe.</p>
<h2>A symptom of the democratic flu</h2>
<p>It’s important to call out Google on political advertising. The company often manages to fly under the radar on this issue, hiding behind Facebook, which takes most of the flack. </p>
<p>The global social media platforms are injecting poison into liberal democratic systems around the globe. The misinformation and outright lies they allow to be published on their platforms is partly responsible for the increasingly bitter deep partisan divides between different sides of politics in most mature liberal democracies. </p>
<p>Add to this the micro targeting of voters illustrated by the Cambridge Analytica scandal, and a picture emerges of long-standing democratic systems under extreme stress. This is clearly exemplified by the UK parliament’s paralysis over Brexit and the canyon-deep political divides in the US.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-you-should-talk-to-your-children-about-cambridge-analytica-94900">Why you should talk to your children about Cambridge Analytica</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Banning political advertising only deals with a symptom of the democratic flu the platforms are causing. The root cause of the flu is the fact social media platforms are no longer only platforms – they are publishers. </p>
<p>Until they acknowledge this and agree to adhere to the legal and ethical frameworks connected with publishing, our democracies will not recover. </p>
<h2>Not platforms, but publishers</h2>
<p>Being a publisher is complex and much more expensive than being a platform. You have to hire editorial staff (unless you can create algorithms advanced enough to do editorial tasks) to fact-check, edit and curate content. And you have to become a good corporate citizen, accepting you have social responsibilities. </p>
<p>Convincing the platforms to accept their publisher role is the most long-term and sustainable way of dealing with the current toxic content issue.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1iCVn_JvOiQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Accepting publisher status could be a win-win, where the social media companies rebuild trust with the public and governments by acting ethcially and socially responsibly, stopping the poisoning of our democracies.</p>
<p>Mark Zuckerberg claims Facebook users being able to publish lies and misinformation is a free speech issue. It is not. Free speech is a privilege as well as a right and, like all privileges, it comes with responsibilities and limitations. </p>
<p>Examples of limitations are defamation laws and racial vilification and discrimination laws. And that’s just the legal framework. The strong ethical frame work that applies to publishing should be added to this.</p>
<h2>Ownership concentration like never before</h2>
<p>Then, there’s the global social media oligopoly issue. Never before in recorded human history have we seen any industry achieve a level of ownership concentration displayed by the social media companies. This is why this issue is so deeply serious. It’s global, it reaches billions and the money and profits involved is staggering. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-fightback-against-facebook-is-getting-stronger-124120">The fightback against Facebook is getting stronger</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Facebook co-founder, Chris Hughes, got it absolutely right when he in his New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/09/opinion/sunday/chris-hughes-facebook-zuckerberg.html">article</a> pointed out the Federal Trade Commission – the US equivalent to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission – got it wrong when they allowed Facebook to buy Instagram and WhatsApp. </p>
<p>Hughes wants Facebook broken up and points to the attempts from parts of US civil society moving in this direction. He writes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This movement of public servants, scholars and activists deserves our support. Mark Zuckerberg cannot fix Facebook, but our government can.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yesterday, I posted on my Facebook timeline for the first time since the Cambridge Analytica scandal broke. I made the point that after Twitter’s announcement, the ball is now squarely in Facebook’s and Google’s courts.</p>
<p>For research and professional reasons, I cannot delete my Facebook account. But I can pledge to not be an active Facebook user until the company grows up and shoulders its social responsibility as an ethical publisher that enhances our democracies instead of undermining them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126260/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Johan Lidberg does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Until the two giants change, Twitter’s political ad ban will have little effect on elections around the globe.Johan Lidberg, Associate Professor, School of Media, Film and Journalism, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1170992019-05-21T04:27:09Z2019-05-21T04:27:09ZAfter Clive Palmer’s $60 million campaign, limits on political advertising are more important than ever<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/275548/original/file-20190521-69169-tpmq4v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Clive Palmer didn't win any seats for his party in the election, but he says his massive advertising spend was "worth it" to prevent Bill Shorten from becoming prime minister.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Darren England/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Can billionaires buy elections in Australia? In the 2019 election, Clive Palmer <a href="https://www.news.com.au/national/federal-election/how-clive-palmers-60-million-spend-won-him-nothing/news-story/34d29d5ba68e78b8abb01865d4cccded">demonstrated</a> they can certainly flood the print media, airwaves, social media and billboards with advertising and have an impact on the results through their preferences and negative advertising.</p>
<p>Apart from United Australia Party hype about how <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-15/few-details-in-united-australia-party-platform/11114346">it was going to win government</a>, most of the high-profile advertising in the 2019 campaign was negative. There is a longstanding 48-hour ban on political advertising in radio and broadcast media prior to polling day, but advertising on <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/ads-chase-voters-online-despite-blackout">social media is not covered</a>. The very useful <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=AU">Facebook Ad Library</a> showed the kind of horrors being broadcast during the 48-hour blackout.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/now-for-the-55-million-question-what-does-clive-palmer-actually-want-116350">Now for the $55 million question: what does Clive Palmer actually want?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The Coalition was running many <a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=482066929200278">“death tax” ads</a> on the Thursday and Friday. These were ads cut to show one Labor frontbencher after another saying the words “death tax”, when in fact they were denying a rumour about such a tax. Negativity, or even sheer invention, proved very effective.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/feIOrmkM9SM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">One of the Coalition’s many “death tax” campaign ads.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>By comparison, Labor ads on issues such as childcare or the gender pay gap – as well as its own negative ads aimed at the Coalition’s disunity and climate change policies – appeared to have little impact.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1J9j21jnX8w?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Labor’s final online advertising push didn’t resonate with voters.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Lack of regulations at federal level</h2>
<p>How have we arrived at a place where our elections are awash with paid advertising? Believe it or not, this has been a relatively recent phenomenon.</p>
<p>In 1903, the <a href="https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/5016210">Labor Party’s manifesto</a> proudly promoted the restrictions that had been placed on campaign expenditure in the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C1902A00019">Commonwealth Electoral Act</a> the year before: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Elaborate precautions exist to prevent wealthy men practically purchasing seats: the expenditure of a senatorial candidate is limited to £250 and of a candidate for the other House to £100.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These expenditure limits became increasingly obsolete and were not enforced. They were discarded at the federal level after 1980, <a href="http://www.utas.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/1163424/UTAS-ISC-Tas-Electoral-Review-Submission-Eccleston-and-Gribble-180720.pdf">following a successful challenge</a> to the election of three candidates in the Tasmanian seat of Denison for each having spent more than A$1,500 in the 1979 state election. </p>
<p>From that time, Australia has been notable for the laxity of its regulation of political finance. At the federal level, there are no restrictions on the size or source of donations to political parties, apart from the recent <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_Representatives/financial_disclosure/files/aec-foreign-donations-fact-sheet.pdf">ban on foreign donations</a>. And there are no limits on campaign expenditure or paid advertising, apart from the requirement for authorisation.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/election-explainer-what-are-the-rules-governing-political-advertising-57880">Election explainer: what are the rules governing political advertising?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>As a result, industry bodies wishing to fend off government regulation of guns or poker machines or financial advice are free to spend as much as they like on political donations and advertising.</p>
<p>There is also <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/20/false-election-claims-spark-push-for-truth-in-political-advertising-laws?CMP=share_btn_tw">no “truth in advertising” requirement</a> at the federal level, and the Australian Electoral Commission does not have the authority to approve electoral communications for publication. The only requirement in the Commonwealth Electoral Act is for authorisation, including of electronic advertising. Ultimately, it is up to the courts to enforce this, on a case by case basis. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1130349744373374976"}"></div></p>
<p>This differs greatly from many countries in Europe, including the UK, Ireland and the Scandinavian countries, which have never allowed such paid political advertising. Two-thirds of European countries limit the amount <a href="https://www.idea.int/data-tools/question-view/562">a candidate can spend</a> on a campaign, including advertising, and 43% limit the amount <a href="https://www.idea.int/data-tools/question-view/560">a party can spend</a>.</p>
<p>When the <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldjudgmt/jd080312/animal-1.htm">House of Lords upheld the UK prohibition on political advertising in 2008</a>, it argued the ban was necessary to maintain a level playing field, preventing “well-endowed interests” from using “the power of the purse to give enhanced prominence to their views.” </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-trails-way-behind-other-nations-in-regulating-political-donations-59597">Australia trails way behind other nations in regulating political donations</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In Australia, the Hawke government tried to stop the arms race over paid political advertising by banning it in 1991 and replacing it with free broadcast time (<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2004A04278">Political Broadcasts and Political Disclosures Act 1991</a>). But the following year, the High Court in <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MelbULawRw/1992/27.pdf">Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd v Commonwealth</a> found that this ban contravened an implied freedom of political communication in the constitution.</p>
<p>This decision put a dampener on reform at the federal level. It is only recently the High Court has changed course to find that burdens on free speech can be legitimate if they serve another democratic purpose, such as political equality.</p>
<p>In the <a href="http://eresources.hcourt.gov.au/downloadPdf/2015/HCA/34">McCloy v NSW</a> case in 2015, the High Court upheld a cap on political donations and a total ban on political donations by property developers, finding the restrictions on freedom of political communication were more than balanced by the benefits of ensuring the integrity of the political system and “<a href="https://theconversation.com/in-mccloy-case-high-court-finally-embraces-political-equality-ahead-of-political-freedom-48746">equality of opportunity to participate in the exercise of political sovereignty</a>.”</p>
<p>The constitutionality of regulating political donations was reaffirmed by the High Court in April 2019. </p>
<p>The government had passed amendments to the Commonwealth Electoral Act to enable Commonwealth law to override the tighter regulation of political donations at the state or territory level. This provision was <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case_b35-2018">overturned by the High Court</a> and Queensland’s ban on developer donations was upheld. This was despite an attempt by the plaintiff, former LNP Queensland President Gary Spence, to argue it restricted freedom of political communication.</p>
<p>These High Court decisions open the way to possible future caps on expenditure and donations at the federal level, which could reduce the torrent of negative political advertising democracy is currently drowning in.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rvZmf-e2L9o?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Clive Palmer’s advertising was largely aimed at Labor’s policies. This ad was viewed more than 800,000 times on YouTube.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Impacts of unlimited spending on democracy</h2>
<p>The lack of restrictions on political expenditure or donations at the federal level has contributed to perceptions that government is run primarily for the benefit of the big end of town. In 2016, 56% of respondents to the <a href="https://australianelectionstudy.org/interactive-charts/">Australian Election Study</a> believed this. </p>
<p>In addition, negative advertising further erodes the public’s faith in government. American political scientist <a href="http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674940574&content=toc">Joseph Nye</a> observed more than 20 years ago a relationship between negative advertising and loss of trust in political parties and government. In the <a href="https://www.democracy2025.gov.au/documents/Democracy2025-report1.pdf">Democracy 2025 survey</a> conducted in Australia last year, respondents were asked about possible reforms to rebuild trust in government. It revealed strongest support for limits on political donations and campaign expenditure. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/facebook-videos-targeted-texts-and-clive-palmer-memes-how-digital-advertising-is-shaping-this-election-campaign-115629">Facebook videos, targeted texts and Clive Palmer memes: how digital advertising is shaping this election campaign</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The laxity of political finance regulation at the federal level also creates loopholes at the state or territory level, where genuine progress has been made in limiting political expenditure by parties, candidates and lobbying groups. </p>
<p>It is equally important that allowing paid political advertising in electronic media drives up the costs of political campaigns and increases dependence on wealthy donors.</p>
<p>Australia could rein in the ever-increasing role of private money in its federal elections. Labor and the Greens are committed to greater transparency for political donations and spending caps on federal campaign expenditure, while the High Court has shown it is now unlikely to strike down reasonable (“proportionate”) regulation of political finance.</p>
<p>Democracy should be about political equality, not about the deep pockets of billionaires.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/117099/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marian Sawer receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>Australia needs to rein in the ever-increasing role of private money in federal elections with caps on political advertising and donations.Marian Sawer, Emeritus Professor, School of Politics and International Relations, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1156292019-05-01T20:17:40Z2019-05-01T20:17:40ZFacebook videos, targeted texts and Clive Palmer memes: how digital advertising is shaping this election campaign<p>This year’s election will be the first in Australia where the parties will be advertising more on social and digital platforms than traditional media (TV, radio, newspapers and magazines). </p>
<p>There are a few key reasons for this. First, cost-wise, social media is far cheaper, sometimes as low as a few cents per click. Unlike heritage media, digital and social is extremely targeted, and can be done in the “dark,” so your opponents may not even be aware of the message you are pushing out.</p>
<p>Digital and social advertising can also be shared or even created by users themselves, further increasing the reach of a party’s messaging. This gets around the <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/about_aec/Publications/Backgrounders/authorisation.htm">Australian Electoral Commission rules on advertising</a> – technically they are not ads since no party is paying for them to be shared on people’s feeds.</p>
<p>Throw into the mix <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/about_aec/Publications/Backgrounders/authorisation.htm">laws on political advertising</a> – which allow parties to advertise up to and on election day on social media, but not traditional media – and we are likely seeing the first largely digitally driven election campaign in Australian political history. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/election-explainer-what-are-the-rules-governing-political-advertising-57880">Election explainer: what are the rules governing political advertising?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Here are a few ways the parties are using advertising in the campaign so far and what makes this election unique: </p>
<h2>What you can do with A$30 million</h2>
<p>Among all the candidates running this year, perhaps no one has used political advertising as prolifically as Clive Palmer. This shows what money can buy. </p>
<p>The most recent Nielsen figures put the cost of Palmer’s ads since September at around A$30 million, though <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/clive-palmer-says-he-s-spent-50-million-on-election-ads">Palmer says himself he’s spent</a> at least A$50 million. This compares to <a href="https://www.afr.com/business/media-and-marketing/clive-palmer-makes-advertising-great-again-20190410-p51cmg">just A$16 million spent in total advertising during the last federal election</a>, with Labor and the Coalition accounting for more than 90% of that.</p>
<p>From a campaign perspective, Palmer is ticking many of the right boxes: a mix of different platforms on digital and social; heritage media ads for mass market awareness featuring candidates selected from the middle; the use of memes and user-generated content; and even text messaging. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0rT6pr1JHsg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">This United Australia Party ad has over 2.4 million views on YouTube thus far, making it the most viewed election ad on the platform.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Despite the ubiquity of his ads, though, Palmer is still struggling to connect with most voters. This demonstrates a very important aspect to any advertising campaign: the actual brand still needs to be seen as offering real value to voters. </p>
<p>The UAP has used text messaging like this one below, for example, to try to change its negative perception with voters by delivering positive campaign promises. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271513/original/file-20190429-194623-18g3h3t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271513/original/file-20190429-194623-18g3h3t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271513/original/file-20190429-194623-18g3h3t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271513/original/file-20190429-194623-18g3h3t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271513/original/file-20190429-194623-18g3h3t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271513/original/file-20190429-194623-18g3h3t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271513/original/file-20190429-194623-18g3h3t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">UAP text message advertisement.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">ABC</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The ‘Grim Reaper’ strategy and micro-targeting</h2>
<p>One of the most effective ads ever done in Australia was the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U219eUIZ7Qo">“Grim Reaper” AIDS awareness campaign</a> in 1987, which showed how well “scare campaigns” and negative messaging can work, given the right context and framing. The ad’s micro-messaging was another aspect that worked so well: it personalised the issue and made it tangible to anyone sexually active. </p>
<p>Basically, negative messaging works on the theory that what you fear, you will avoid – or the “fight or flight response”. Negative political ads highlight the level of risk and consequence of a certain party’s policies – and then emphasise how to avoid this by not voting for them. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-scare-campaigns-like-mediscare-work-even-if-voters-hate-them-62279">Why scare campaigns like 'Mediscare' work – even if voters hate them</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Trouble is, most ads on TV are losing their potency. As attitudes towards political messaging and brands become increasingly negative, voters are less likely to watch ads in their entirety. Many people also don’t see them as being personally relevant. </p>
<p>Social media, though, provides an excellent delivery mechanism for these types of messages. Digital ads can be personalised and focused on issues that voters have already expressed an interest in and therefore find relevant to their lives. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271519/original/file-20190429-194633-nvfanz.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271519/original/file-20190429-194633-nvfanz.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271519/original/file-20190429-194633-nvfanz.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=463&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271519/original/file-20190429-194633-nvfanz.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=463&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271519/original/file-20190429-194633-nvfanz.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=463&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271519/original/file-20190429-194633-nvfanz.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=581&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271519/original/file-20190429-194633-nvfanz.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=581&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271519/original/file-20190429-194633-nvfanz.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=581&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Personalised messaging from the LNP on Facebook, targeting voters in the seat of Ryan in western Brisbane.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Facebook Ad Library</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Social media ads can also be altered to be even more targeted as the campaign goes on, based on voter responses. And their speed of production – only taking a matter of hours to produce and place online – allows digital advertising to do what heritage no longer can and provide a more fluid, grassroots dynamic to campaigning. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=418441522327628">This ad by Labor featuring Prime Minister Scott Morrison in bed with Palmer</a>, for example, was released on social media within 24 hours of the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-25/federal-election-liberals-strike-preferences-deal-clive-palmer/11046512">preference deal struck between the Coalition and Palmer’s UAP</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271516/original/file-20190429-194612-y5zd2u.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271516/original/file-20190429-194612-y5zd2u.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271516/original/file-20190429-194612-y5zd2u.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271516/original/file-20190429-194612-y5zd2u.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271516/original/file-20190429-194612-y5zd2u.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=596&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271516/original/file-20190429-194612-y5zd2u.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=596&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271516/original/file-20190429-194612-y5zd2u.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=596&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Labor’s Facebook ad depicting Scott Morrison in bed with the UAP’s Clive Palmer over their preference dealing.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=418441522327628">Facebook/Click here to watch the video</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>That said, even on social media, negative advertising is not as effective if it just comes from the party itself. But when combined with information from third-party sources, such as from the media, this can increase the effectiveness. For example, the Liberal Party used the 10 Network image in this ad to support its claims on Labor’s tax policies. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271517/original/file-20190429-194637-s1eo97.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271517/original/file-20190429-194637-s1eo97.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271517/original/file-20190429-194637-s1eo97.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=458&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271517/original/file-20190429-194637-s1eo97.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=458&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271517/original/file-20190429-194637-s1eo97.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=458&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271517/original/file-20190429-194637-s1eo97.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271517/original/file-20190429-194637-s1eo97.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271517/original/file-20190429-194637-s1eo97.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Facebook Ad Library</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Youth engagement</h2>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/more-grey-tsunami-than-youthquake-despite-record-youth-enrolments-australias-voter-base-is-ageing-115842">Youth voter enrolment is at an all-time high</a> in Australia, driven, in part, by engagement and participation in the marriage equality plebiscite in 2017. </p>
<p>The major parties are aware of this and are creating ads specifically targeting this demographic on Snapchat, WhatsApp and Instagram. Some of these are “dark social” ads (meaning they can only be seen by the target market) or are user-made so not to be subject to disclosure rules. </p>
<p>For more general audiences, Labor has created ads like <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=all&country=ALL&q=Australian%20Labor%20Party&view_all_page_id=307341981788">this one on Facebook</a> that highlight issues young voters are concerned about, such as wage increases and penalty rates. Ads like this also attempt to engage with these voters by asking them to sign petitions – a form of experiential marketing that’s proved highly effective with young audiences, as seen through platforms such as Change.org. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271520/original/file-20190429-194633-1275gtk.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271520/original/file-20190429-194633-1275gtk.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271520/original/file-20190429-194633-1275gtk.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=626&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271520/original/file-20190429-194633-1275gtk.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=626&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271520/original/file-20190429-194633-1275gtk.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=626&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271520/original/file-20190429-194633-1275gtk.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=787&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271520/original/file-20190429-194633-1275gtk.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=787&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271520/original/file-20190429-194633-1275gtk.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=787&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Labor Facebook ad inviting voters to sign a petition demanding a higher wage.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Facebook Ad Library</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Groups like the Australian Youth Climate Coalition are tapping into experiential marketing by combining online advertising with a call for offline action on issues that appeal to young voters, such as climate change. Part-rock concert, part-protest, these events might remind some of the rallies that proved so popular during the Gough Whitlam era. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271521/original/file-20190429-194637-1o0xgl9.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271521/original/file-20190429-194637-1o0xgl9.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271521/original/file-20190429-194637-1o0xgl9.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=552&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271521/original/file-20190429-194637-1o0xgl9.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=552&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271521/original/file-20190429-194637-1o0xgl9.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=552&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271521/original/file-20190429-194637-1o0xgl9.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=694&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271521/original/file-20190429-194637-1o0xgl9.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=694&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/271521/original/file-20190429-194637-1o0xgl9.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=694&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The AYCC is using a combination of online and offline strategies to engage with young voters.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Facebook Ad Library</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The increasing influence of lobbying groups</h2>
<p>One of the more interesting developments of this election so far is the increasing sophistication, knowledge and strategies of political lobbying groups, or Australia’s equivalent to <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/political-action-committee">America’s PACs</a>.</p>
<p>GetUp! is one such group, <a href="https://www.getup.org.au/about/powering-getup">collecting A$12.8 million in donations</a> in the last 12 months alone. Among the group’s tactics are direct phone calls to voters, partly achieved through “phone parties” where volunteers freely offer their time, phones and other resources to call people in targeted electorates. GetUp! has a goal of <a href="https://www.getup.org.au/">making 1 million phone calls</a> in the lead-up to the election.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uokLybT3RgE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">A GetUp! video ad encouraging voters to host ‘calling parties’</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Other well-funded groups, such as the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-21/what-is-advance-australia/10520122">right-aligned Advance Australia</a>, are also seeking to influence the narrative in the election, particularly in electorates like Warringah, where <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/apr/15/zali-steggall-calls-on-pm-and-abbott-to-reject-sexualised-captain-getup-video">it has released ads</a> against Tony Abbott’s challenger, Zali Steggall. </p>
<p>In part to counter the influence of lobbying groups, the Australian Council of Trade Unions has launched its <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/unions-launch-new-tv-advertising-campaign/d1391e49-d939-466f-b378-88bcacc1adbf">own advertising campaign</a> featuring working Australians describing how hard it is to make ends meet. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/VxxpQxN9E5M?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The ACTU’s “Change the Government, Change the Rules” campaign.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The rise of these groups in Australian politics opens a Pandora’s Box on just who can influence elections without even standing a single candidate – an issue that’s becoming <a href="https://theconversation.com/democracy-is-dead-long-live-political-marketing-2666">part of politics now in many Western democracies</a>. As many in politics would know, where there is money, there is power, and where there is power, there are those who are seeking to influence it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/115629/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Hughes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The major parties are focusing on social media like never before to get their messaging out – and finding more creative ways to do it.Andrew Hughes, Lecturer, Research School of Management, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.