by Eve Schlegel

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey recently announced that Twitter will ban all political advertisements on its platform. In a Twitter post on his own page, he said he believed that the reach of political messages “should be earned, not bought.” Dorsey believes the spreading of misinformation makes putting out political ads impossible to regulate, and worries that it has “significant ramifications that today’s democratic infrastructure may not be prepared to handle.”

Republicans have attacked Dorsey for this decision, claiming that it is an attempt to censor conservatives. With President Trump’s most famous source of communication being Twitter, and a history of accusations against Twitter for their treatment of conservatives, this reaction is expected.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez backed Twitter’s decision, saying in a tweet that “if a company cannot or does not wish to run basic fact-checking on paid political advertising, then they should not run paid political ads at all.”

Some political groups and super political action committees have complained that Twitter’s new rule has disrupted election strategies and budgets for the upcoming 2020 elections. This drastic change makes it difficult for campaigns to adjust, especially after being halfway through the campaign cycle.

Twitter ads have made up a very small percentage of political advertisements that campaigns put towards social media, with most money going towards Facebook and Google ads. The discussion of online political ads became more prominent than ever after the 2016 election. When Russians used U.S. social media to infiltrate public opinion, it created debates that still occur today on what social media company’s roles should be in regulating political advertisements. The challenge in limiting political ads is defining what exactly is “political.”

Twitter described political ads as advertisements that “advocate for or against legislative issues of national importance.” The company said it involves anything that references “a candidate, political party, elected or appointed government official, election, referendum, ballot measure, legislation, regulation, directive or judicial outcome.”

These restrictions not only impact Twitter users, but advertisers as well. Removing political advertisements prevents “micro targeting,” a common tactic used by advertisers to target specific audiences.

“We very much believe that cause-based advertising has value, and can help drive public conversation around important topics,” said Del Harvey, the vice president of trust and safety at Twitter. “But we still don’t think it should be used with the sort of primary goal of driving political or judicial or legislative or regulatory outcomes.”

Banning political advertisements on Twitter will set a precedent for how other social media regulate the topic on a global scale. For example, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has decided to allow all advertisements to run, including false ones. He defends this decision by arguing that the platform supports free expression and gives people a voice. Democrats have attacked Facebook’s approach to this situation. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts claimed Zuckerberg is operating a “disinformation-for-profit machine.”

Each election, the topic of political advertisements on platforms like Twitter becomes more prevalent. Twitter’s decision to strip all political advertisements showcases its significant action to ending the spread of misinformation in the political arena.