25
The need for transparency in online political ads
By Michael Foley Legislation forcing social media giants such as Facebook and Google to disclose the source of funding for any political advertising that appears on our timelines and feeds is expected to be in place before the next general election. The legislation was introduced by James
Lawless, Fianna Fáil TD for Kildare North. The Online Advertising and Social Media Transparency Bill is modest in terms of the wider debate about regulating social media, protecting people’s privacy and even combating fake news. But in the light of the advertising that appeared on social media sites before the referendum on the 8th Amendment, its simplicity is what might make it effective in bringing clarity to online political advertising. As well addressing advertising during elections and referendums, it would also ensure transparency of the use of advertising during an industrial dispute.
The NUJ supports Mr Lawless’ bill. Irish Secretary Séamus Dooley and I, as vice chair of the Ethics Council, spoke at the Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Change and Environment when it considered the bill last June. Late last year a policy forum was held in Dublin Castle to consider issues surrounding online transparency and political advertising, attended by the Minister for Communications, Richard Bruton, Mr Lawless, NGOs involved in online regulation and privacy issues, lawyers, civil liberties groups, representatives of social media companies and the NUJ.
The wide-ranging discussion reflected the need for online regulation and the confusion surrounding the issues. Richard Bruton spoke of the positive side of
the Internet and its ability to strengthen democracy, but added that its ‘destructive side’ raised serious questions. There were powerful forces, and the internet presented a new way of waging war, he said.
Michael Foley Dr Alessio Cornia of Dublin City University
said a study of the recent US presidential election identified real concerns about the influence of online advertising that came from “suspicious groups”, many believed to have been Russian. Something with “more teeth” than a voluntary code was needed to regulate online political advertising, he said. Both Ryan Meade of Google and Niamh
Sweeney of Facebook agreed on a need for clarity. Ms Sweeney had told the Oireachtas Committee that Facebook supported the bill but wanted clarification on who would determine if an advertisement was political. “We accept that we have a greater
responsibility to act and we are doing our best to do that,” she said. The most forthright contribution came from
Joe Lynam, a former BBC journalist now with the European Commission, who told the forum that Russia wanted to break up the EU and would prefer to deal with less powerful nation states. The commission has set up a new unit to monitor and counter false narratives about the EU.
He said society must fight to preserve the truth. “The practitioners of disinformation have tens of millions of dollars in St Petersburg,” Mr Lynam said. An interdepartmental group on the security of the Irish electoral process established in the wake of Mr Lawless’ bill found risks to the electoral process were relatively low, but the spread of disinformation online and the risk of cyberattacks on the electoral system posed more substantial risks. The belated decision by Google to ban
adverts relating to the 8th Amendment referendum and Facebook’s announcement that they would only allow referendum adverts to be bought by organisations within the Republic of Ireland underlined the need for this legislation. However, we cannot rely on voluntary actions
by foreign-owned tech giants to protect our democracy.
Michael Foley is vice chair of the NUJ’s Ethics Council.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28
