CNN News: 美社交媒體相繼就政治廣告表態(tài)

You don't have to look hard on social media to find opinions concerning politics. But the political ads you see could be changing in some way or another as the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election approaches. Targeted political advertisements are controversial. On one hand they can give campaigns a way to reach and inspire specific voters and to share information that voters might not see elsewhere. On the other, they can deepen divisions among social media users and spread information may not be true. You've heard the term fake news.

在社交媒體上不難找到涉及政治的觀點(diǎn)。但隨著2020年美國總統(tǒng)大選的臨近，大家在社交媒體上看到的政治廣告可能會發(fā)生某種形式的變化。有針對性的政治廣告一直備受爭議。一方面，這些廣告能提供接觸和鼓勵特定選民的方式，同時分享選民在其他地方無法看到的信息。另一方面，這些廣告會加劇社交媒體用戶的分歧，并傳播可能并不真實(shí)的信息。大家都聽過假新聞這一說法。

Social media companies profit from political ads. The re-election campaign of U.S. President Donald Trump has spent more than $14 million on Facebook ads this year. And the election campaigns of the top two Democratic spenders on Facebook candidates Tom Steyer and Pete Buttigieg, have also spent a combined total of $14 million. Twitter's decided to get rid of targeted political advertisements altogether. Its CEO says a political message can earn reach when people retweet it or follow the account but that these messages shouldn't be bought by political campaigns and then forced on Twitter users.

社交媒體公司通過政治廣告盈利。今年，美國總統(tǒng)唐納德·特朗普的連任競選活動已在臉譜網(wǎng)廣告上花費(fèi)了超過140億美元。在臉譜網(wǎng)上花費(fèi)最多的兩名民主黨候選人是湯姆·斯泰爾和皮特·布蒂吉格，兩人總共花費(fèi)了140億美元。推特決定全面禁止有針對性的政治廣告。推特首席執(zhí)行官表示，政治信息會在人們轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)或關(guān)注時產(chǎn)生影響，但這些信息不應(yīng)由政治競選活動花錢購買，之后再強(qiáng)加給推特用戶。

Google is a question mark. The Wall Street Journal reports that the technology company is considering changing its policies when it comes to political ads. If that happens, it could effect what you see across all of Google's platforms, like YouTube. Facebook's also considering rule changes concerning political ads and that might include sharing info about who paid for an advertisement. But it doesn't look like Facebook is going to start fact checking the ads that run on its platform.

谷歌的決定還是未知數(shù)。據(jù)《華爾街日報》報道，這家科技公司正在考慮改變其涉及政治廣告的政策。如果確定更改，那會影響包括YouTube網(wǎng)站在內(nèi)的所有谷歌平臺。臉譜網(wǎng)也在考慮涉及政治廣告的規(guī)定，這可能包括共享支付廣告者的信息。但看起來臉譜網(wǎng)不會對其平臺上的廣告開展事實(shí)檢查。

Facebook's executives say it's not their place to decide whether an ad is true or false. And supporters of the policy say that's the job of journalists anyway. Opponents say Facebook allows false information to be spread if an ad's found to be untrue and their concerned that campaigns could abuse that freedom on Facebook. Could these companies pick and choose which ads are allowed based on their own fact checking? Yes, but doing that has brought them accusations of censorship and bias in the past.

臉譜網(wǎng)高管表示，廣告是真是假不應(yīng)由他們來決定。這項(xiàng)政策的支持者表示，無論如何這都是記者的工作。反對者則稱，如果廣告被發(fā)現(xiàn)不屬實(shí)，那臉譜網(wǎng)就是在傳播虛假信息，他們擔(dān)心競選活動會濫用臉譜網(wǎng)上的自由。這些公司能依據(jù)自己的事實(shí)檢查來選擇批準(zhǔn)哪些廣告嗎？可以，但這樣做曾導(dǎo)致他們被控存在審查問題和偏見。