Politicians, Illegal Facebook Ads: The Age of Online Disruption
From October 6th all candidates for the upcoming elections were required to halt any public promotional activities or campaigns. Posters were required to be stripped off any walls, boards or hoardings in preparation for the elections that will be carried out this Saturday. In the age of media disruption there appears to be one place where the rules should apply but are not enforced. The internet.
Yesterday in the afternoon I noticed a tweet from an individual claiming to have seen an advertisement on Facebook by a politician asking for votes where clicking on the ad would lead to their fan page where more promotional activities could be carried out. On further investigation it turned out that it wasn’t just one but instead many who were guilty of this act.
Yes, this is illegal. Yes, it should be stopped. But is just stopping these ads enough? Short answer: no. We are beginning the move to a world where the real world practices are about to be disrupted by the future of the internet, and social media, and we need to be ready for it.
The Age of Disruption
Ever since media became digitized, various sectors have continued to be disrupted so strongly that new rules have had to be laid down entirely for this online world. Due to the nature of this disruption the possible outcomes have become so endless that simply attempting to take a real world rule and apply it “as is” to the online world has in nearly every case proved to be an absolute failure. If rules are to be applied to facets of government operations such as elections then there are various hurdles to overcome which policy makers must understand and address before it is too late.
Just to give an idea of the depth of the issues at hand, it isn’t just a Facebook Advertisement that needs to be looked at. An advertisement on Facebook is fairly straightforward where it is a direct violation of the laws pertaining to canvassing for elections. But how does one police these advertisements that are still being run? What about Facebook pages? Once the ban has been set on all forms of public promotion or canvassing does further conversation with ‘fans’ of a politician’s public Facebook page constitute as a violation of the law? Must the Facebook page be taken down or should it remain up, given that all past promotional media still exists online? If the politician has, as I suspect in the near future they will, a Twitter account with the visibility status set to public and simply puts up a status saying “Vote for me X Y Z” does that also fall into violations of the law? One could simply draw a line and say any form of online conversations that hint at a request for a vote that can also be viewed publicly are all illegal but then doesn’t that begin to encroach on one’s right to freedom of speech? What if the politician simply replies to someone on Twitter? It is then a conversation between just two parties on Twitter but it remains publicly visible.
The rabbit hole goes deeper
What if a politician has two Twitter accounts where one is setup specifically for canvassing, and addressing voters and the other is a personal account which the politician uses for his/her own everyday Twitter purposes. Do the rules apply equally there? If a politician begins to send Direct Messages to all his/her followers or fans on Twitter or Facebook where these messages are viewable only to the receiver then does that constitute as a violation? If yes then doesn’t that cause a conflict with the current rule set that applies only to “all public forms of canvassing”?
Twitter and Facebook are just the beginning of it all. What about email? What policies apply to promotional media uploaded to Scribd, Slideshare, various file sharing services and other social networks such as Google+? Does a hangout on Google+ constitute as an announcement? Recorded videos added to YouTube will remain. Must they be taken down? What about issues of server locations? Time zones? To say that the only solution to such a vast number of hurdles is an info suicide would be terrible as these forms of media could be used in the future to guide a more transparent government built with the principles of accountability in mind. Where else would we have instant access to all previously written mandates and speeches made by the politicians we voted for?
A stitch in time…
As always, in the online world the once black and white lines begin to go gray and steps must be taken immediately to ensure a future where the two environments can coexist peacefully. To do this however, first the policy makers must embrace the world of online services and social media. Realize its potential. Devastatingly wrong decisions are always taken when people don’t understand what they are making decisions upon and when there is a lack of understanding there is the fear of the unknown that emerges which can only continue to cloud further decisions. Furthermore, given the nature of law this kind of mistakes will only have a knock on effect leaving an uncertain online future for years to come.
I sincerely hope that someone who can make a decision on these issues will see this message and begin to take steps to shape the future of policies in Sri Lanka that will embrace and grow with the age of disruption, instead of waiting for disruption to overtake us all.
To learn more about Adnan Issadeen you can follow him on @area51research, or find out more via http://identyme.com/adnanissadeen. If you wish to discuss your company’s tech product, release or any other tech related venture OR if you have an inside scoop send a mail to adnan.issadeen@live.com. All material will be treated anonymously if required by you. To keep up with the latest discussions, questions and sneak peeks join the Techrumble page on Facebook @ http://www.facebook.com/techrumble
