Slashdot Mirror
Placing Election Ads On Google Will Require a Government ID (gizmodo.com)
Google announced new policies Friday that will require advertisers to prove they are a U.S. citizen or permanent resident when buying election ads. "Under the new guidelines, Google will ask advertisers -- be they individuals, organizations, or political action committees -- to prove they are who they claim to be," reports Gizmodo. "It will also require the ads to include a clear disclosure of who is paying for it." From the report: The change comes after Google and other social media companies revealed their advertising platforms were abused by foreign actors, including the Russian government-backed troll farm Internet Research Agency, during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. It also places Google's policies in line with U.S. laws for traditional media that restrict foreign entities from running election ads. Where Google's effort falls short, at least in its current iteration, is the new policies only cover ads featuring candidates running for office. So-called "issue ads" that advocate a certain point of view on hot-button topics are not covered in Google's policies.
Yeah, because if there's one thing foreign intelligence organizations are totally incapable of and stymied by, it's creating a fake ID.
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
Seems perfectly reasonable to only allow citizens of a country to buy political adverts in that country during an election cycle.
Can't wait to see how some people slam this new regulation as an attack on the free speech of Russians...
If you are advertising a product or service of any kind online, and making "promises" as to the "benefits" of throwing your "real world money" at it will have for you, shouldn't there be a solid record - a name, an ID number, a contact email and phone number, a valid business or personal address - of who the hell you are? If it is possible to buy online advertising anonymously - no ID of any kind required, just transfer some money somehow - you just made life super-easy for any kind of scammer selling any kind of scam online, whether political, or financial, or otherwise. So in my view, the verified ID information of SOMEONE who is behind the ad in question should be there, and it should be possible to QUERY that information as well. If I, as a person, am being subjected to hundreds of unwanted ads a day, some legit, some scams, shouldn't I have the right to be able to lookup who placed the ad? You're putting YOUR ad in MY webbrowser after all. Why wouldn't I be able to look up who placed or paid for the ad with a simple click?
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
So I think it's a great idea, that will really put some fear into Democrats and Republicans alike.
However there's one last aspect I'd love to see - let me see the name on the ID that was approved for purchasing the ad. That would go a long way to uncovering a variety of shadow groups, including false flag ads...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Because foreign intelligence backed entities really care about legality? It's already very illegal to operate as an unregistered foreign operative in the US.
Election Ads are generally just plain wrong.
It at most allow candidates to get through a simple black or white stance on issues rather than allowing people to understand the candidateâ(TM)s ideas, reasons, moral standing, motivations etc.
Election Ads are mostly fake news anyway even if itâ(TM)s by US citizens.
We should set a limit on campaign spending and have more robust debates rather than fucking Ads.....
Pope Rat-so says:
So where are the "Russians" that showed up in court?
Wow, for months now, Russians have been popping up all over in every post you make, motherfucker. Now they've disappeared?
Anyone think this would be happening if Hilary had won?
Since people of color seem to be unable to get valid government-issued ID. That's always what we're told when voter ID legislation is on the line. So this new policy is just going to prevent people of color from making their voices heard on Google. Google is racist and just trying to suppress those voices.
Which mass shooter got their weapons this way? Sandy Hook? Nope, he murdered his mother and stole her guns. Florida? Southland? Nope.
The "guns-show loophole" simply doesn't exist in reality as it does in the minds of the gun confiscation crowd. Anyone purchasing a firearm from a dealer, even at a gun show, must go through the same ID, Form 4473, and background check as they would in a store. In truth, at any gun show there may be a few private individuals who might sell one or two firearms, without a check required, but they can do that without being at a gun show. It's simply a private sale. If you only make occasional sales of firearms from your personal collection, you do not need to be licensed.
Also, background checks are required for all sales at gunshows in most blue states already (so if that's where mass shooters get their guns, by your logic, mass shootings in blue states demonstrate the failure of these laws).
Also, it seems to me that gun "hoarders" would actually be a good thing. They own far more firearms than they can use at one time, so they are in fact keeping those weapons of the street.