UN Facebook Sold $100,000 Worth of Ad Space to Russia During 2016 Elections - The nothingburger saga continues

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...peration-spent-100k-issues-ads-during-n799381

SAN FRANCISCO — Facebook said on Wednesday it had found that an influence operation likely based in Russia spent $100,000 on thousands of ads promoting divisive social and political messages in a two-year-period through May.

Facebook, the dominant social media network, said that many of the 3,000 ads promoted 470 "inauthentic" accounts and pages that it has now suspended. The ads spread polarizing views on topics including immigration, race and gay rights, rather than backing a particular political candidate, it said.

Another $50,000 went to about 2,200 "potentially politically related" ads and might have been bought by Russians in potential violation of U.S. election law.

Facebook announced the findings in a blog post by its chief security officer, Alex Stamos, and said that it was cooperating with federal inquiries into influence operations during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

The company said it found no link to any presidential campaign. Three-fourths of the divisive issue ads were national in scope, and the rest did not appear to reflect targeting of political swing-states as voting neared.

Facebook did not print the names of any of the suspended pages, but some of them included such words as "refugee" and "patriot." Many of the pages were connected to each other in some way.

Even if no laws were violated, the pages ran afoul of Facebook requirements for authenticity, setting up the suspensions.

More than $1 billion was spent on digital political ads during the 2016 presidential campaign, 10,000 times the presumed Russian spending identified by Facebook's security team.

But the findings buttress U.S. intelligence agency conclusions that Russia was actively involved in shaping the election.

Facebook previously published a white paper on influence operations, including what it said were fake "amplifier" accounts for propaganda, and said it was cracking down.

As recently as June, it told journalists that it had not found any evidence to date of Russian operatives buying election-related ads on its platform.

A Facebook employee said Wednesday that there were unspecified connections between the divisive ads and a well-known Russian "troll factory" in St. Petersburg that publishes comments on social media.

Beyond the issue ads, Facebook said it uncovered another $50,000 in political advertising that might have a link to Russia. Some of those ads were bought using computers with U.S. internet protocol addresses but set to the Russian language, though they were displayed to users in English.

Ellen Weintraub, a member of the U.S. Federal Election Commission, said U.S. voters deserve to know where election ads are coming from and that the money behind them is legal.

"It is unlawful for foreign nationals to be spending money in connection with any federal, state or local election, directly or indirectly," Weintraub said in a phone interview.

She declined to comment on the Facebook ads, saying she could not comment on subjects that could come before the agency.

Not all politically-related advertising by foreigners is illegal in America. Facebook did not give any examples of the ads at issue.

Weintraub said that campaign finance regulations, which require disclosure of spending and disclaimers on ads, may need to be revised to keep up with the evolution of online advertising.

Facebook's disclosure may be the first time a private entity has pointed to receiving Russian money related to U.S. elections, said Brendan Fischer, a program director at the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington nonprofit that advocates for more transparency.

"Whoever may have provided assistance to Russia in buying these Facebook ads is very likely in violation of the law," he said.

Given the U.S. prohibition on foreign money being spent in elections, Facebook has a legal duty to act if it is aware of similar activity in the future, Fischer said.

"I'm certain that the special counsel would be interested in this information, and I would presume that if Robert Mueller’s team has not received this information from Facebook, they’ll be asking for it soon," Fischer said.

Mueller is the special counsel who is investigating whether there was collusion between President Donald Trump's presidential campaign and Moscow.

Facebook said it was trying.

"We are looking at how we can apply the techniques we developed for detecting fake accounts to better detect inauthentic Pages and the ads they may run," Stamos said in the blog post.
 
I'm still not quite sure what your point is; this is the media settling for a slice when they failed to grab the rest of the loaf. Watching idiot pundits dance around, pretending the case has been cracked wide open when it really hasn't, is why I posted it.

This isn't anything yet. This is just something Facebook said about their own operations.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Sergeant Politeness
Regardless of if they're public or not, this is the age where literally everything gets leaked, yet somehow, the biggest coverup since Watergate involving the government of another giant country has yet to come out. You'd think, with all the media's supposed journalistic manpower, they could find some actual hard link between Trump and Russia. They could get an insider, a whistleblower. It's yet to happen, and it's blatantly transparent that it's just a dead narrative to distract us.

I'm still not quite sure what your point is; this is the media settling for a slice when they failed to grab the rest of the loaf. Watching idiot pundits dance around, pretending the case has been cracked wide open when it really hasn't, is why I posted it.

I'm commenting on why people are interested in FB revealing what seems like a small amount of money spent on ads and explaining why it raises eyebrows. It would be naive to assume that this would be the only single instance of the behavior and that occurred in some vacuum. $100,000 in ads is usually just one tiny pie piece allocated in a much larger overall campaign. Most political PR firms won't even get out of bed unless you've got at least $1,000,000 ready to spend on ads for a particular issue campaign and that's just on a state level campaign.

I think you are vastly overestimating "leaks" and the ability of power brokers and politicians to keep things out of the media. In the age of "access" to politicians being a priority it's sad at how much that should be made public never sees the light of day. The fact that the budgets for in-depth investigative reporting are a pittance compared to what they were back in the days of Watergate is also a huge problem.

When I hear a piece of information "leaked" I usually assume that it's at best 1% of the story and don't count on the other 99% ever seeing the light of day. Leaks are generally used just to send a message or sway someone, not to crack open a case or story or lead to any truth or justice.

Not to mention, if there's one person/country I wouldn't want to be a whistleblower against it's fucking Putin. Dude has had people killed left and right for far less infractions. Being a journalist in Russia is probably the most hazardous job right behind being an opposition politician. I'm gobsmacked Garry Kasparov is still alive.
 
When I hear a piece of information "leaked" I usually assume that it's at best 1% of the story and don't count on the other 99% ever seeing the light of day. Leaks are generally used just to send a message or sway someone, not to crack open a case or story or lead to any truth or justice.

I'm almost irritated at talk about "leaks" when there is an immense amount of information right in the FEC databases under public disclosures that nobody even fucking bothers looking at.
 
This isn't anything yet. This is just something Facebook said about their own operations.

It sounds like all Facebook advertising operations are about to be under a lot more intense scrutiny, rules, and red tape when it turns out advertising on Facebook means they could be publishing Election Advertisements.

Sounds like a lot more work and money spent on people making sure they follow the exact legal code on where these entities buying ad space are allowed to advertise on Facebook.

Nice job putting the spotlight on yourself, Facebook.
 
I'm almost irritated at talk about "leaks" when there is an immense amount of information right in the FEC databases under public disclosures that nobody even fucking bothers looking at.

It's a guidebook to vested interests and who has bought and paid for almost every politician in the country. But journalists pouring over the databases for weeks to uncover relevant information is expensive and boring. Talking up bullshit and rubbing elbows with politicians at cocktail parties is far more fun and cheap.

Besides why bother with real information when good ratings are achieved simply by letting self-proclaimed insider assholes yell opinions at each other (and they do it for free) on the cable news channels. Cheap false theatrics have been keeping the coffers filled at the cable news networks for years now.
 
It's a guidebook to vested interests and who has bought and paid for almost every politician in the country. But journalists pouring over the databases for weeks to uncover relevant information is expensive and boring. Talking up bullshit and rubbing elbows with politicians at cocktail parties is far more fun and cheap.

Nobody cares about it. Nobody pays any attention.

Even if you dig up absolute, obvious corruption in it, and put it up in public, nobody cares.

This is why this country is shit.
 
Nobody cares about it. Nobody pays any attention.

Even if you dig up absolute, obvious corruption in it, and put it up in public, nobody cares.

This is why this country is shit.
Remember back when people said that the government has better things to do than to spy on everyone, then it turned out that's exactly what they did and no one gave a fuck?
 
Back