Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter.
TikTok users, no matter whether they are old enough to vote, will be spared from seeing political ads within the app.
TikTok vows to be a political safe space
With the presidential election just over a year away, political advertisements on the Internet are quickly becoming hard to avoid. But there's at least one place online to escape from it all: TikTok.
The trendy video-sharing platform, popular among the members of Generation Z, wants to become a digital space totally safe from both traditional partisan vitriol and the new wave of disinformation that has sullied the last couple of elections. And so it announced last week that it is barring all ads related to candidates and political issues in the United States.
Although many of the app's 80 million users are not yet old enough to vote, TikTok's politics-free zone provides a unique experience at a time when other social media platforms are rife with paid election content.
Launched in 2017 and owned by the Chinese tech company ByteDance, TikTok allows users from all over the world to post and share short videos, often accompanied by music. Blake Chandlee, TikTok's vice president of global business solutions, said in a blog post Friday that the app's mission is to "inspire creativity and build joy." To achieve this levity, the TikTok team says political ads will have no place on the app.
The ban sounds comprehensive. It includes any paid advertising promoting or opposing candidates, current elected officials, or political parties or groups. It also blocks ads related to the election, advocacy or issues on the federal, state or local levels.
The decision not only creates a political desert island for TikTok's users but also allows the company to sidestep the complicated issue of naming the sponsors of many political ads.
Unlike paid spots on TV, on the radio or in print, online ads aren't subject to the same federal regulations. But there are impassioned if stalled efforts in Washington to change that.
Some Republicans have joined Democrats in Congress in promoting legislation dubbed the Honest Ads Act, which would require Facebook and Google (and other social media platforms as they grow in size) to reveal the pricing, target audience and identity of the advertisers behind political ads on their sites. Similar language was passed by the Democratic-run House as part of the sweeping democracy reform bill known as HR 1, but that measure has been doomed to oblivion in the Senate under GOP Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.
Federal Election Commission Chairwoman Ellen Weintraub has been pushing regulations mandating similar disclosures, and for a time a bipartisan agreement on her board seemed possible. But the commissioners this summer failed to reach a consensus on the details, and now the agency has essentially been pitched in policymaking limbo for lack of a quorum.
Proponents of online ad disclosures say that sustaining the current absence of transparency will guarantee even more disinformation and voter suppression efforts online, and by more nefarious actors, than Russia's widespread if carefully concealed efforts three years ago. The opposition fears any new requirements could infringe on the First Amendment rights to unfettered political speech
For the time being, anyway, TikTok is content to sit this fight out.
- Bipartisan call from political operatives for online ad disclosures ›
- FEC stalled on regulations for online political ads - The Fulcrum ›
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter.
Computer company Hewlett Packard received a perfect score from the index for its policies on political spending disclosure.
Big companies disclosing more could-be-secret political spending, analysis shows
An increasing number of the country's largest publicly traded companies are disclosing more than ever about political spending habits that the law permits them to keep secret.
That's the central finding of the fifth annual report from a group of academics and corporate ethicists, who say the average score among the biggest companies traded on American exchanges, the S&P 500, has gone up each year since 2014.
Though corporate political action committees must disclose their giving to candidates, those numbers are very often dwarfed by the donations businesses make to the trade associations and other outside groups that have driven so much of the steady rise in spending on elections. Conservatives say robust disclosure of these behaviors is the best form of regulating money in politics and is working fine, and this new report reflects that. Those who say campaign finance needs more assertive federal regulation will argue such corporate transparency is inconsistent and inadequate to the task, and the new report underscores that.
Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon is joined by fellow Democratic members of the House and Senate this summer to discuss legislation that would attempt to prevent hacking into the country's election systems. Intelligence officials announced late last week an outline for how to release information about possible hacks during the 2020 elections.
Intel community promising more transparency about election hacking efforts
A year from the presidential election, U.S. intelligence agencies have adopted a new framework for how they will inform candidates, groups and the public about attempts to disrupt our country's elections by foreign operatives.
But the one-page summary of the plan, released late last week, is so general that it remains unclear what the intelligence community plans to do if and when it discovers something suspicious.
The summary by the director of national intelligence states that the federal government will "follow a process and principles designed to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that notification decisions are consistent, well-informed and unbiased."
The new framework is designed to prevent a repeat of some of what happened after the 2016 election.