[27182818284]

The grandparent's reaction is a bit unkempt.

I suggest that it is very possible that Facebook, with its access to something like 1 billion MAUs, needs to be regulated, and regulated possibly differently than companies before it. The FEC has some rules for political ads with respect to the Internet, but I am in favor of revisiting those to see what rules need to be established for the greater good of the public

>There are no easy answers to "keeping propaganda off Facebook"

It appears that Russians bought $100,000 worth of ads, so that is some place to start looking that is wholly different than a discussion on politics of users.

[walru]

So is $100,000 worth of ads enough to sway an election? Because I have stats claiming nobody clicks on ads.

[27182818284]

Indeed it does seem cheap. They don't have to click on them, though. They don't have to log in and take out their CC to be effective. Neither do political TV ads and other older media. It wasn't enough to win the popular vote, but could it have been enough to change some folks' minds in swing states where the EC gives them more weight? Maybe yeah. Maybe enough that the feds are looking at the Facebook ad buys.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

Fake news does not look like ads, and if targeted to receptive individuals, it gets retweeted/fb-shared to a like-minded audience. The comparison with "nobody clicks on ads" is not apt.

[Crespyl]

The things election ads are selling don't need clicks to recoup the investment.

[orevidence]

or evidence showing what their impact is, apparently. let’s just intuit it!