The love-hate relationship between 2020 presidential candidates and tech giants: A delicate dance of money, online influence and populist anger
The love-hate relationship between 2020 presidential
candidates and tech giants: A delicate dance of money, online influence and
populist anger
BY SOO RIN KIM Jul 27, 2019, 6:22 AM ET
Democrats vying for presidential election in 2020 are
finding themselves caught in a Catch-22 as they spend millions of dollars to
take advantage of the tremendous sway social media giants have on voters as
they criticize big tech as having too much power.
"Today’s big tech companies have too much power —
too much power over our economy, our society, and our democracy," Warren
said in March as she released of her new policy proposal to break up tech
giants like Facebook, Google and Amazon to create a more balanced market
consumers, leading a pack of Democratic presidential hopefuls echoing the same
concerns about what they see as the unchecked powers and influence social media
and tech giants have in society.
"They’ve bulldozed competition, used our private
information for profit, and tilted the playing field against everyone
else," Warren said at the time.
And this week, the Federal Trade Commission slapped
Facebook with a $5 billion finefor its oversight on user privacy and the
Department of Justice has opened up an investigation into big tech companies'
alleged anti-competitive behaviors.
But the sweet power of paid placements on social media --
including strategic spending on digital platforms that curate deeply relevant
and individually-targeted content for primary voters -- is critical for
campaigns as they strive to build strong grassroots support in early states and
in key geographic areas.
And in less than a month after Warren's declaration, her
campaign paid Facebook and Google nearly a half million dollars for digital ad
placement, including ones calling for dissolution of the very same tech giants.
In two months, her online ad spending grew to $1 million. To date, the Massachusetts
senator remains one of the largest patrons among the field of presidential
hopefuls of big tech companies for ad buys -- spending at least $3 million on
ad placements on various online platforms since January this year.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who answered "yes, of
course," when asked if he supports Warren's crusade against big tech, has
spent $2.7 million running ads on Facebook and Google, and Sen. Kamala Harris,
D-Calif., who said in an interview with CNN that the U.S. "should seriously
take a look at" dismantling Facebook, has similarly spent $2.4 million on
Facebook and Google ads.
Former Vice President Joe Biden, too, who said breaking
up Facebook is "something we should take a really hard look at" in an
interview with The Associated Press, has become one of the most aggressive
online advertisers despite jumping into the presidential bid much later than
his rivals, purchasing more than $3.4 million worth of digital ads since late
April this year, according to ABC News' analysis of his campaign disclosure
report.
"We are running a robust digital advertising
operation to ensure we are putting our campaign in a position of strength to
take on Donald Trump," Biden's campaign spokesperson Matt Hill told ABC
News in a statement. "Meeting voters where they are on digital platforms
is crucial for a modern presidential campaign and strategic investments in
advertising will remain a priority."
In total, Democrats running for presidency in 2020 have
spent nearly $28 million on online ads since January this year, according to
Democratic digital firm Bully Pulpit's analysis of Facebook and Google ad data.
In comparison, Trump's reelection campaign, back by the Republican National
Committee's massive war chest, has run about $13 million worth of Facebook and
Google ads so far this year.
South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Cory Booker,
D-N.J. -- who have been fundraising among Silicon Valley power brokers -- have
taken a more diplomatic stance, acknowledging the need for checks and balances
on social media giants but stopping short of calling for break up of the
companies. Buttigieg and Booker have spent $2.5 million and $2 million,
respectively, on Facebook and Google ads so far.
And big spending on digital ads wasn't limited to
candidates with big sums in their banks -- many of the lower-tier candidates
too were also dishing out on online campaigns, so much so that some of them
were burning through much of their campaign funds on digital operations, a
costly effort to boost the number of donors so that they can qualify for the
debates.
Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., and former Housing and
Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro burned through more than half of
their total spending throughout the second quarter on digital ads, while
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., spent about a
third and a fourth of their funds, respectively, on digital ads.
"I really don't want to spend all my campaign money
on Facebook right now trying to get unique donors," said Sen. Amy
Klobuchar, D-Minn., whose presidential campaign has spent about $1.6 million on
Facebook and Google ads so far this year.
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, on Thursday, filed a $50
million lawsuit against Google, accusing the company of discriminating against
her campaign and controlling public access to information by temporarily
suspending her ad account without any explanation. Her campaign has spent a
total of about $620,000 on Facebook and Google ads so far this year.
Google's spokeswoman Riva Sciuto told ABC News in a statement
that the suspension of the Gabbard campaign's ad account was an automated
process triggered by an unusual activity, and said that the account was
restored shortly.
"We have automated systems that flag unusual
activity on all advertiser accounts -- including large spending changes -- in
order to prevent fraud and protect our customers," Scuito said. "In
this case, our system triggered a suspension and the account was reinstated
shortly thereafter. We are proud to offer ad products that help campaigns
connect directly with voters, and we do so without bias toward any party or
political ideology."
Concerns over the lack of oversight on social media
giants have been brewing over the last couple years, following the revelations
of Facebook's massive user privacy data breach -- as well as an extensive
Russian disinformation campaign to influence the 2016 presidential election, an
issue that was revisited during special counsel Robert Mueller's testimony on
Wednesday. Several of the Democrats -- including Biden, Warren and Klobuchar --
have criticized social media giants, calling for transparency in online
campaign ads, which are not bound by the same disclosure rules as political ads
on television, radio and print news.
Facebook, Google and other online platforms since 2018
have started disclosing some information on sponsors behind political ads, but
the Congress, the tech industry, and the regularly agencies have yet to find
common ground on comprehensive and uniform way of disclosing the information.
"All eyes are on campaigns’ digital operations for a
multitude of reasons -- it’s a scalable way to meet donor requirements for
debates, and it’s an effective way to personally and authentically talk to
supporters and prospective voters en masse -- and that’s just the start,"
Bully Pulpit Interactive Director Jane Hughes told ABC News.
"While candidates are right to call out foreign
interference in our elections, it’s also true that hundreds of millions of
Americans rely on tech platforms for their information and spend more time
online than with any other medium," Hughes added. "This makes it a
natural -– and critical -– place for candidates to talk to and with voters in a
highly tailored, targeted way."
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in an op-ed earlier this
year, called for more government regulation on harmful content, election
integrity, privacy and data portability, admitting that social media giants
have "too much power over speech" and that "we shouldn't make so
many important decisions about speech on our own," but Facebook's vice
president for global affairs and communications Nick Clegg in another op-ed
later that year pushed back against the calls for breaking up Facebook.
Zuckerberg, in an interview with ABC News' George
Stephanopoulos earlier this year, said he is "confident" about the
2020 presidential election, saying Facebook has learned a lot since 2016 and is
investing more on safety and security measures to protect the integrity of
American elections.
But as the federal government revisits Facebook's past
data breach incident and alleged monopolistic tendencies, 2020 Democrats' interest
in the big tech industry is expected to continue.
"I think we need vigorous antitrust legislation in
this country because you are seeing--you name the area, whether it's
pharmaceuticals, whether it is Wall Street, whether it is high tech,"
Sanders said at a Washington Post event last month.
Comments
Post a Comment