good from google. next stop ban all political ads please
I do have a begrudging admiration for the Save the 8th organizers. They are very very good at what they do.
Keeping a straight face whilst bending people to your will is not easy.
The whole campaign reminds me of Hillary / Trump.
You had one side debating issues and putting forward reasonable arguments whereas the other side just didn’t take part and instead made up their own reality.
What I’ve seen a bit on social media (but not the official groups) is a move towards turning the save the 8th campaign into an anti-establishment vote and following the same tracks as Trump and Brexit. Whatever else about your feelings on this specific issue, that mode of politics is dangerous going forward.
Worth a try I suppose. How trump sold himself as an anti-elite candidate is beyond comprehension.
Those tactics have been used in emotive referendums in the past - eg divorce.
I guess the proliferation of social media has made it more dangerous. People getting info from wild sources. I saw one showing the entrance to Kilkenny Hospital with the article underneath saying that they are sectioning off part of the hospital because this is where abortions will take place and that the vote is already rigged. Lunatic stuff altogether but plenty of people seem to be lapping it up judging by the comments
I saw one posted by some LGBT group that’s against abortion. Picture was of an empty classroom with a headline saying that this is how all classrooms will look in 10 years as all children will be aborted.
I thought it was a joke, but it seemed to be a genuine ‘pro-life’ page.
A lot of the “groups” have the same people and same addresses, but it looks impressive that there are so many groups out there.
The new angle is that if there is a low turnout and yes gets in by, say, 55/45 it will mean that the oireachtas cannot move the legislation as there’s is no mandate for it. Have been told that by several people who are listening to campaigners.
The fault in that logic is that if you follow that argument through it means there must be a very very low number of no voters…
Not to mention that every election and referendum produces a mandate as only those who vote can expect to have a mandate to exercise.
Just heard some no campaigner saying this was an attempt by google to skew the referendum result. tosser.
Here’s a screenshot of someone sharing the pic. Seems to be a genuine Facebook account. Maybe they were ‘hacked’ but you’d think it would be removed
That’ll get the teachers voting anyway.
I’ve been travelling a bit and the No side seem a lot more active in rural areas. The stat on Down kids today is also a step back for the Yes side. Add in a natural kick at Govt on the HSE debacle and at this point I would be predicting a relatively clear No.
Okay they shouldn’t be self regulating but better that then they do nothing and allow the Wild West advertising continue on their platforms.
Either they get heavily regulated or a blanket ban on all political advertising needs to take place, it is too easy to abuse.
I think his point is that a company like Google is in a position where it - rather than the government - decides what people see in an election or referendum campaign, it should be regulated rather than self-regulated. He refers to a ban across all Google platforms being in response to their wish to avoid being perceived as having cost this referendum, by facilitating a No vote through hosting their ads. It’s a judgement call that could have gone either way, the fact that it’s the ‘right’ decision now shouldn’t mask that fact.
it was done because of the grossly misleading stuff from the No campaign which is everywhere - i logged into a UK football forum and there was a No advert there courtesy of adsense. Usually I have an adblocker but not on my ipad so i saw it.
You even had Lucinda Creighton yesterday saying how it was unacceptable for these companies having to do this because they cannot control what adverts they had, not a person strong on irony…
But how do does anyone know who is spending what on these ads, that’s the problem, no way of tracking if campaign budgets are being adhered to. So you have right wing US groups paying for ads and basically subverting our democratic process. They need to ban political ads on all digital platforms imho.
in light of the controversy surrounding fake news sites, the US election, Brexit and all of that it was inevitable that Google/Facebook would draw the line somewhere and this referendum, chock full of American and UK activists for one side in particular, was always going to stand out.
When Facebook said they were banning non irish resident adverts it was quickly pointed out that the No campaign is stuffed with American Activists resident in Ireland since the referendum was confirmed. Sure one even had the @ireland twitter account pretending to be just student living in ireland and it was discovered that she was in Ireland to campaign for the No side. Then last week we had another UK resident No side activist who refused to engage with people and broke the rules of curating the account. When she was told of this she started posting the usual graphic images we are seeing outside maternity hospitals and primary schools before she was kicked off of it. The No side is full of people for whom the normal boundaries of debate in Ireland mean nothing.
Sure, John Waters was on newstalk yesterday and I could see his side of the story and appreciate it simply because he wasn’t ranting and raving and acting like many of the others on the No side do, for example John McGuirke on The Last Word the other night (and he is the PRO of the No campaign).
I’ve said it before, these guys will cost the No side in a tight campaign result - i have seen women disgusted that when their kids go online to do something they are presented with this stuff. Probably whey they are no going on about the oireactas, they know they’ve lost the electorate and can only pray for a low turnout.
I think the point is: should it be up to Google to decide what ads it allows, or to judge the truthfulness of the ads it carries. ‘Grossly misleading’ is subjective. For example, Google is a west coast US tech company - I think it safe to assume it has a generally liberal workforce in terms of social policy - so them deciding what it carries in an abortion referendum is justifiably a concern for conservatives.