Connect with us

U.S.

Facebook Will Not Run New Political Ads in the Week Before the Election

Published

on

  • Facebook released a series of new policies aimed at fighting misinformation as the election draws closer. Those policies include removing posts that use COVID-19 as a way to discourage voting, and adding information labels to any post where a candidate preemptively declares victory. 
  • The policy that attracted the most attention was Facebook’s plans to not accept new political ads the week before the election, with CEO Mark Zuckerberg explaining that there may not be enough time to contest or fact check information in that limited time.
  • Both sides have criticized this choice, with President Donald Trump’s campaign saying it goes too far by silencing political campaigns.
  • Other critics think the measure does not do enough to combat misinformation and feel the platform should be doing more to monitor political speech and ads during this time.

Facebook Announces New Tools to Fight Election Misinformation 

Facebook unveiled a slate of new policies Thursday that will be enacted to protect the upcoming election, including barring new political ads the week before Election Day. 

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg explained in a statement that in the final days leading up to the election, there may not be enough time to contest or fact check information in new political advertisements. Facebook has long faced pressure to limit or even ban political ads on the platform. Zuckerberg has usually opposed that idea, making this one of the strongest actions he has ever taken against the practice. 

“This election is not going to be business as usual,” Zuckerberg wrote in a statement. “We all have a responsibility to protect our democracy. That means helping people register and vote, clearing up confusion about how this election will work, and taking steps to reduce the chances of violence and unrest.”

In addition to not accepting new political ads, Facebook will also be removing posts that use COVID-19 to discourage voting, adding an informational label to posts that seek to delegitimize the outcome of the election or voting methods, and adding labels to posts made by politicians who might declare victory before the final results are in. 

The site even plan to link to accurate results on those kinds of posts and is working with Reuters on providing election results and information. On top of that, the social media giant is working to register voters heading into November 3.

Zuckerberg expressed concern about how the public might respond in the likely event that it could take several days for election results to come in as a result of increased mail-in voting. He said that it is “important that we prepare for this possibility in advance and understand that there could be a period of intense claims and counter-claims as the final results are counted.”

“I believe our democracy is strong enough to withstand this challenge and deliver a free and fair election,” Zuckerberg said in closing his statement. He suggested that it will take the work of political parties, candidates, election officials, media, and voters to make that happen. 

Criticism of New Policies

These measures were met with backlash from figures on both sides of the political aisle. While the Joe Biden campaign has yet to issue an official statement about the news, President Donald Trump’s campaign condemned it, thinking it went too far in silencing political campaigns.

“In the last seven days of the most important election in our history, President Trump will be banned from defending himself on the largest platform in America,” Samantha Zager, the Trump campaign’s deputy national press secretary said in a statement. Though, despite the suggestions of this claim, political speech on the platform is not banned. Trump is still allowed to post during that week, the campaign is just not allowed to run new political advertisements. 

On the other side of the debate, some thought Facebook’s new rules did not go far enough in fighting misinformation, which runs rampant on the site. Dipayan Ghosh, the co-director of the Harvard Kennedy School’s digital platforms and democracy project, told ABC News that the move is “narrow.”

“I think we have to acknowledge that in prohibiting new political advertising over that last week, the company is essentially volunteering the position that it believes that political ads have the potential to harm the democratic process,” Ghosh explained. “The question then is, why stop them just one week before Election Day? Especially in an election cycle when many people will have voted well before Election Day because of mail-in ballots or early voting.”

Media Matters president Angelo Carusone called these actions “pointless.”

“Of all of the issues with disinformation and extremism on Facebook — political ads are at the bottom of the list,” Carusone wrote in a statement. “Facebook’s signal-boosting right-wingers and lax policy enforcement are much bigger issues: It wasn’t Facebook’s political ads that brought the Kenosha killer to Wisconsin, after all.”

“This is just another PR stunt from Facebook. Don’t buy it,” he said.

Other Responses

Not all responses to Facebook’s new policy were negative, though. Some expressed optimism, albeit cautiously. Vanita Gupta, the President and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, believes that these policies have potential so long as they are executed properly. 

She said that these plans are “significant improvements & come after much pressure from civil rights community.”

“But everything – any impact – rests on enforcement,” she added.

Claire Wardle, the U.S. director of First Draft, a nonprofit group that combats misinformation, told the Washington Post that she was pleasantly surprised by these new steps. 

“It’s a strange feeling to read something by Mark Zuckerberg and say, ‘Yup, yup, yup,'” she said. “I’m pretty excited by it.”

See what others are saying: (ABC News) (Washington Post) (Politico)

U.S.

Survey and Census Data Shows Record Number of Americans are Struggling Financially

Published

on

Americans are choosing not to pursue medical treatment more and more frequently as they encounter money troubles.


A recent federal survey shows that a record number of Americans were worse off financially in 2022 than a year prior.

Coupled with recent census data showing pervasive poverty across much of the country, Americans are forced to make difficult decisions, like foregoing expensive healthcare. 

According to a recent Federal Reserve Bureau survey, 35% of adults say they were worse off in 2022 than 2021, which is the highest share ever recorded since the question was raised in 2014. 

Additionally, half of adults reported their budget was majorly affected by rising prices across the country, and that number is even higher among minority communities and parents living with their children.

According to recent census data, more than 10% of the counties in the U.S. are experiencing persistent poverty, meaning the area has had a poverty rate of 20% or higher between 1989 and 2019. 

16 states report at least 10% of their population living in persistent poverty. But most of the suffering counties were found in the South — which accounts for over half the people living in persistent poverty, despite making up less than 40% of the population. 

These financial realities have placed many Americans in the unfortunate situation of choosing between medical treatment and survival. The Federal Reserve study found that the share of Americans who skipped medical treatment because of the cost has drastically increased since 2020. 

The reflection of this can be found in the overall health of households in different income brackets. 75% of households with an income of $25,000 or less report being in good health – compared to the 91% of households with $100,000 or more income. 

See what others are saying: (Axios) (The Hill) (Federal Reserve)

Continue Reading

U.S.

Montana Governor Signs TikTok Ban

Published

on

The ban will likely face legal challenges before it is officially enacted next year. 


First Statewide Ban of TikTok

Montana became the first state to ban TikTok on Wednesday after Gov. Greg Gianforte (R) signed legislation aimed at protecting “Montanans’ personal and private data from the Chinese Communist Party.”

The ban will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2024, though the law will likely face a handful of legal challenges before that date. 

Under the law, citizens of the state will not be held liable for using the app, but companies that offer the app on their platforms, like Apple and Google, will face a $10,000 fine per day of violations. TikTok would also be subject to the hefty daily fine. 

Questions remain about how tech companies will practically enforce this law. During a hearing earlier this year, a representative from TechNet said that these platforms don’t have the ability to “geofence” apps by state.

Roger Entner, an analyst at Recon Analytics, told the Associated Press that app stores could have the capability to enforce the restriction, but it would be difficult to carry out and there would be a variety of loopholes by tools like VPNs.

Montana’s law comes as U.S. politicians have taken aim at TikTok over its alleged ties to the CCP. Earlier this year, the White House directed federal agencies to remove TikTok from government devices. Conservatives, in particular, have been increasingly working to restrict the app.

“The Chinese Communist Party using TikTok to spy on Americans, violate their privacy, and collect their personal, private, and sensitive information is well-documented,” Gov. Gianforte said in a Wednesday statement. 

Criticism of Montana Law

TikTok, however, has repeatedly denied that it gives user data to the government. The company released a statement claiming Montana’s law “infringes on the First Amendment rights of the people” in the state. 

“We want to reassure Montanans that they can continue using TikTok to express themselves, earn a living, and find community as we continue working to defend the rights of our users inside and outside of Montana,” the company said. 

The American Civil Liberties Union condemned Montana’s law for similar reasons. 

“This law tramples on our free speech rights under the guise of national security and lays the groundwork for excessive government control over the internet,” the ACLU tweeted. “Elected officials do not have the right to selectively censor entire social media apps based on their country of origin.”

Per the AP, there are 200,000 TikTok users in Montana, and another 6,000 businesses use the platform as well. Lawsuits are expected to be filed against the law in the near future.

See what others are saying: (Associated Press) (Fast Company) (CBS News)

Continue Reading

U.S.

How a Disney-Loving Former Youth Pastor Landed on The FBI’s “Most Wanted” List

Published

on

 “Do what is best, not for yourself, for once. Think about everyone else,” Chris Burns’ 19-year-old son pleaded to his father via The Daily Beast. 


Multi-Million Dollar Scheme 

Former youth pastor turned financial advisor Chris Burns remains at large since going on the run in September of 2020 to avoid a Securities Exchange Commission investigation into his businesses.

Despite his fugitive status, the Justice Department recently indicted Burns with several more charges on top of the $12 million default judgment he received from the SEC. 

Burns allegedly sold false promissory notes to investors across Georgia, North Carolina, and Florida. The SEC claims he told the investors they were participating in a “peer to peer” lending program where businesses that needed capital would borrow money and then repay it with interest as high as 20%. Burns allegedly also reassured investors that the businesses had collateral so the investment was low-risk. 

The SEC says that Burns instead took that money for personal use. 

Burns’ History 

Burns began his adult life as a youth pastor back in 2007 before transitioning into financial planning a few years later.  By 2017, he launched his own radio show, The Chris Burns Show, which was funded by one of his companies, Dynamic Money – where every week Burns would “unpack how this week’s headlines practically impact your life, wallet, and future,” according to the description. He also frequently appeared on television and online, talking about finances and politics. 

The SEC alleges that he used his public appearances to elevate his status as a financial advisor and maximize his reach to investors.

His family told The Daily Beast that he became obsessed with success and he reportedly bought hand-made clothes, a million-dollar lakehouse, a boat, several cars, and took his family on several trips to Disney World. His eldest son and wife said that Burns was paying thousands of dollars a day for VIP tours and once paid for the neighbors to come along. 

Then in September 2020, he reportedly told his wife that he was being investigated by the Securities Exchange Commission but he told her not to worry. 

The day that he was supposed to turn over his business documents to the SEC, he disappeared, telling his wife he was just going to take a trip to North Carolina to tell his parents about the investigation. Then, the car was found abandoned in a parking lot with several cashier’s checks totaling $78,000

FBI’s Most Wanted

The default judgment in the SEC complaint orders Burns, if he’s ever found, to pay $12 million to his victims, as well as over $650,000 in a civil penalty. Additionally, a federal criminal complaint charged him with mail fraud. Burns is currently on the FBI’s Most Wanted list. 

Last week, the Justice Department indicted him on several other charges including 10 counts of wire fraud and two counts of mail fraud. 

“Burns is charged for allegedly stealing millions of dollars from clients in an illegal investment fraud scheme,” Keri Farley, Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta, said in a statement to The Daily Beast. “Financial crimes of this nature can cause significant disruptions to the lives of those who are victimized, and the FBI is dedicated to holding these criminals accountable.”

His family maintains that they knew nothing of Burns’ schemes. His wife reportedly returned over $300,000 that he had given to her. 

She and their eldest son, who is now 19, told The Daily Beast they just want Burns to turn himself in, take responsibility for his actions, and try to help the people he hurt. 

“Do what is best, not for yourself, for once. Think about everyone else,” Burns’ son said in a message to his father via The Daily Beast. 

See what others are saying: (The Daily Beast) (Fox 5) (Wealth Management)

Continue Reading