Jump to content

Jo Biden (& US Election)


Recommended Posts

Well here's something to stir the pot... Apparently Facebook as been charging Biden more for adverts than Trump; to the tune of ~$8,000,000 were Biden getting Trumps average cheaper rates. One example (there are more) from the analysis:

 

The difference was especially stark in advertisements aimed primarily at Facebook users in swing states in July and August, where Biden’s campaign paid an average of $34.34 per 1,000 views, more than double Trump’s average of $16.55. During that period, Biden also paid more for ads that ran nationally and in other states—an average of $28.55 to Trump’s $20.35. 

 

 

Facebook dismissed the number cruncher's results as "...misunderstanding of how digital advertising works...".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Facebook dismissed the number cruncher's results as "...misunderstanding of how digital advertising works...".

 

Sounds to me like Facebook might have been "spamming" users with Biden ads, and charging for the priveledge.  Bias maybe ?

 

I didn't get that from reading the article. You have to buy adverts (in blocks of 1000 from the looks of it) in the first place and you specify specific geographic locations and user interests to target them at. I'm not saying there's bias here (I don't know) but it's a flip-side to the "left-wing tech-giants are biased!!!" point raised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there is that much conspiracy theory/bullsh!t/waffle, and plain rubbish spouted about Trump/Biden, I thought that I would just add some to the mix...  :thmbsup

 

I'm not really surprised at the Democrats spending.  Here in the UK, if a politician wants to appear as the most popular candidate, they cover every available lamp post etc with leaflets proclaiming the name etc.   Spending on Facebook advertising is just another facet of the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're missing the point I think; the same number of adverts issued to the same audience was seeing Biden charged more than Trump. In this case, it's not a matter of who spends more; rather why one side is charged more. Personally, I don't really care but it does appear to go against the narrative being pushed by Trumps both big and small.

Edited by Roachmill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, the good old "TDS" jibe. It is not uncommon to formulate opinions based on evidence and facts, Colin.

It wasn't a 'jibe'. 

As for 'facts and evidence', I couldn't care less. 

For the last 4 years we have been bombarded by the 'guff' and 'flatulence' that seems to be american politics and,frankly, I am fed up with it.

 

There are no UK subjects who are really able to influence the american vote so, let them get on with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So why pat yourself on the back for not being in the minority to suffer from "TDS" (with rolling eyes emoji!)?

 

As for not caring about facts and evidence... eh... do you not think that's something to do with where we are now.

 

As for British subjects not having an impact on the US platform - are you unaware of the links between Nigel, Steve, Boris and Donald? We may be the whipping boy in the equation, but do you not appreciate the situation we are putting ourselves in? "We" have put ourselves into the hands of Boris, Nigel and Steve's hands. Trump is just waiting to grab us by the whatever. At least Biden would engage in some old school foreplay first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...