Knowledge of who is paying for political advertisements is a foundational principle of campaign transparency. Understanding who is attempting to influence voters and how much they have spent on those efforts is essential to creating an informed electorate.
Those are the lessons state Attorney General Bob Ferguson is imparting through lawsuits recently filed against Google and Facebook, and they are lessons the tech giants would be wise to heed. “In our view the law is pretty clear on this point,” Ferguson told The Seattle Times. “I understand this is a hassle for them, but I think the voters of our state have made it clear they expect transparency in this area.”
In accepting campaign dollars for political ads, media companies are required to keep detailed records of who is placing those ads and how much they are spending. The same rules are followed by TV and radio broadcasters, newspapers, billboard owners, and anybody else who sells campaign ads. The data are required to be shared with the state Public Disclosure Commission, which makes it readily accessible under transparency laws passed by voters in 1972.
Ferguson’s lawsuits allege that Google and Facebook failed on both counts — collecting and reporting the information. According to his office, over the past decade, Washington candidates and political committees reported about $3.4 million in payments to Facebook and $1.5 million to Google related to advertising. But having information from one side of the equation leaves the public without a complete picture. “It’s all about having multiple sources to verify who is seeking to influence elections,” said Toby Nixon, president of the Washington Coalition for Open Government.
Online expenditures have ballooned in recent years as digital platforms have seized an increasing share of the advertising landscape and become important factors in influencing the public. And with growing questions about the role foreign entities played in the 2016 election, the issue strikes at the very heart of our electoral process. A lack of transparency foments mistrust in our political system.
This does not mark the first time Ferguson’s office has worked to hold powerful interests accountable to Washington election law. In 2013, the national Grocery Manufacturers Association launched a surreptitious — and successful — campaign to defeat a ballot measure that would have required labels upon genetically modified foods. A lawsuit brought by the state resulted in fines of $18 million plus legal costs of $1.1 million levied upon the grocery association. That ruling is being appealed, but it should have served as a clear message to Facebook and Google that Washington is serious about enforcing campaign law.
Instead, when Eli Sanders of a Seattle newspaper, The Stranger, requested information regarding campaign ads, the companies failed to produce it, providing the impetus for the recent lawsuits. Google officials have responded with a decision to stop accepting political ads in state elections — at least until they can figure out a way to comply with state law. Facebook officials have been more obtuse in their response.
The bottom line is that any entity receiving money for running political ads must be held to the same standard — be it a global media giant or a local newspaper. While some might question the role that campaign advertising can play in influencing the public, we retort by pointing out how much money is spent on such advertising.
The effectiveness is clear, a fact that calls for transparency.
