Read on Twitter
Interesting story in The Times today about the UK government's £3.6bn ’Towns Fund’ that was targeted (in part) towards marginal seats before last year’s election.
Here’s a bit of a thread on that… https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/ministers-lavished-millions-on-towns-in-marginal-tory-seats-before-polls-p9xmcb2w8?t=ie
Here’s a bit of a thread on that… https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/ministers-lavished-millions-on-towns-in-marginal-tory-seats-before-polls-p9xmcb2w8?t=ie
This also played out on Facebook, where the gov ran ads targeted at the towns getting investment via a new “My Town” page.
They went live the same day as the election was agreed.
(Initially, Facebook didn’t flag these as political ads:
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50263197)
They went live the same day as the election was agreed.
(Initially, Facebook didn’t flag these as political ads:
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50263197)
This campaign targeted 18 towns (of the 101 which are part of the My Town programme), including Northampton (the two Northampton seats had Tory majorities < 1,500), Newcastle Under Lyme (Lab majority 30), Morley (Tory majority ~ 2,000) along with other hypermarginals.
They only spent a little money (£758) and the ads only ran for a few days, with the government saying it had always intended them to run for just a week. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50270727
A similar campaign popped up again between March 10th and 31st, this time on the main UK Government Facebook page.
This time the government spent around £20k, buying up to 6.7m impressions of the ads.
https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=GB&impression_search_field=has_impressions_lifetime&q=town&view_all_page_id=408582579294175&sort_data[direction]=desc&sort_data[mode]=relevancy_monthly_grouped
This time the government spent around £20k, buying up to 6.7m impressions of the ads.
https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_type=political_and_issue_ads&country=GB&impression_search_field=has_impressions_lifetime&q=town&view_all_page_id=408582579294175&sort_data[direction]=desc&sort_data[mode]=relevancy_monthly_grouped
When this campaign launched, the local elections were still scheduled for May 7th (they were postponed until 2021 on March 13th).
Many (but not all) of the ads reached areas/voters with forthcoming elections.
I.e. Similar timing to the effort just before the General Election.
Many (but not all) of the ads reached areas/voters with forthcoming elections.
I.e. Similar timing to the effort just before the General Election.
In a way, this type of reporting is a victory for the transparency we’ve been calling for the last few years.
The ads are visible and appeared (eventually) in an ad library.
Journalists and political opponents can hold them accountable (and are doing so, hence the story).
The ads are visible and appeared (eventually) in an ad library.
Journalists and political opponents can hold them accountable (and are doing so, hence the story).
But it also speaks to the grey areas in UK election law in the digital age.
Campaigns are 'always on' and use multiple sources/pages to push helpful messages.
Public engagement (“tell us what you think”) reinforces political points (“we spend money where you live”).
Campaigns are 'always on' and use multiple sources/pages to push helpful messages.
Public engagement (“tell us what you think”) reinforces political points (“we spend money where you live”).
Campaigns pop up and down before their origins and motivations can be properly questioned.
Blink and you miss them (see also the Russia Report).
Blink and you miss them (see also the Russia Report).
No, we’re not surprised at politicians doing things that help them get re-elected.
But we’re always dismayed at the shifty little moves that nibble away at public trust and political accountability.
But we’re always dismayed at the shifty little moves that nibble away at public trust and political accountability.
