Thread by @bansisharma

1. About Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, and Political Ads

I articulated my position on Facebook fact-checking political speech eleven days ago in the below tweet.

Mark Zuckergerg has been talking about the issue extensively and I want to capture in this thread some of his remarks.

https://twitter.com/bansisharma/status/1183219198870409216

2. To be clear, I don't like how Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook has abused private data gathered from its users. Facebook needs to do a lot more to protect user privacy, but that is a different topic. On the issue of fact-checking political speech, I concur with Zuckerberg.

3. "We don't fact-check political ads," Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a recent speech. "We don't do this to help politicians, but because we think people should be able to see for themselves what politicians are saying."

4. Byron York says this about the above: "That might be simple common sense to many Americans, but to some Democrats these days, and particularly the Joe Biden campaign, it's a dangerous point of view."

5. Biden recently complained when Facebook declined to censor an ad from the Trump reelection campaign that said, "Joe Biden promised Ukraine $1 billion if they fired the prosecutor investigating his son's company."

6. "Everything in the ad is factually accurate," Trump campaign spokesman said, adding that the spot was reviewed by lawyers prior to its release — and it is certainly in line with the political debate that dominates today's news. Biden campaign demanded Facebook ban the ad.

7. A Facebook spokesman replied that the company made its decision out of respect for free expression and faith that a controversial ad will receive intense scrutiny in today's media world.

8. "In mature democracies with a free press, political speech is already arguably the most scrutinized speech there is," the Facebook spokesman said. Not long after, Zuckerberg made a more complete defense of Facebook's policies in a speech at Georgetown University.

9. "The company faces a wide variety of problems when it comes to freedom of expression", Zuckerberg said. "Some of those problems have solutions that have broad public support."

10. He continued, "For example, there is a consensus that Facebook should censor incitements to violence, or child pornography, or terrorist threats."

11. "But political speech is something different. Much of it is supposed to highlight differences in opinion. It targets divisions in the electorate. It can be rough. And that has always been the case."

12. "I know many people disagree, but, in general, I don't think it's right for a private company to censor politicians or the news in a democracy," he said. "And we're not an outlier here. Other major internet platforms and the vast majority of media also run these same ads."

13. Zuckerberg explained at some length that since 2016, when some Russian ads directed at the U.S. presidential campaign appeared on Facebook, the company has taken extensive steps to verify the origin of ads and to make sure they are what they purport to be.

14. Facebook accounts that are widely viewed are required to provide a government identification and prove their location in order to run a political ad. Fake accounts are removed.

15. But Facebook made a decision, in Zuckerberg's words, to "focus on the authenticity of the speaker rather than the content itself." After all, the content of some of the 2016 Russian ads would have been permissible if the ads had come from Americans.

16. "The real issue was that it was posted by fake accounts coordinating together and pretending to be someone else." Therefore, it is more effective for Facebook to focus on authenticity rather than trying to devise "an ever-expanding definition of what speech is harmful."

17. So Facebook chooses not to play the role of speech police, at least as far as political ads are concerned. "As a principle, in a democracy, I believe people should decide what is credible, not tech companies," Zuckerberg said.

I agree.

The End