We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
SOCIAL MEDIA GIANT Facebook has announced that it is banning all ads on its platform related to the upcoming referendum if they are from advertisers based outside of Ireland.
Facebook said that it will not allow any ads coming from foreign sources which are deemed to be “attempting to influence the outcome of the vote on May 25″.
It said that this would relate to paid of advertisements on its platform.
“We do not intend to block campaigns and advocacy organisations in Ireland from using service providers outside of Ireland,” the company said in a statement on its website.
The ban from Facebook comes following concerns that unknown actors from outside of the state could buy ads to influence Irish voters ahead of the historic referendum.
On 25 May the Irish public will vote on whether to repeal of retain the Eighth Amendment of the constitution – which grants the equal right to life to the mother and the unborn child.
Transparency campaigners and advocates have been voicing concerns over a number of difficult to trace advertisements related to the referendum that have been appearing on Facebook and other platforms in recent weeks.
Online advertising is not regulated for under Ireland’s electoral laws.
Currently, there are no laws or regulations governing social media advertisements or targeting of voters by overseas organisations in relation to the upcoming referendum.
Statement
In its statement, Facebook said that its move was in order to “help protect the integrity of elections and referendums from undue influence”.
“Our company approach is to build tools to increase transparency around political advertising so that people know who is paying for the ads they are seeing, and to ensure any organisation running a political ad is located in that country,” Facebook said.
It said that as part of these efforts, it is building tools that would require potential advertisers to verify that they are resident in the country where the election is taking place.
Facebook said that for the purpose of the referendum it would operate as though these tools were in place in Ireland.
“We feel the spirit of this approach is also consistent with the Irish electoral law that prohibits campaigns from accepting foreign donations,” it said.
“A welcome development”
Commenting on the move, Press Ombudsman Peter Feeney called it a “welcome development”.
“It’s an acknowledgment by Facebook that they have a responsibility for their role in the public discussion that’s taking place around the Eighth Amendment,” he said.
It’s only a small step, but it’s a very welcome step.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
That is very bad news for Amnesty’s campaign which is almost entirely funded by George Soros as we all know by now.
@Dee O’Connoll: amnesty haven’t touched that money it’s sitting in a bank account
The millions of dollars spent by American evangelicals to literally trick and lie to Irish people though, that’s going to be curtailed
@Dee O’Connoll: by the way there’s no way in an article that has only been viewed 900 times that your comment has been liked 36 times in eleven minutes when the next best liked comment is 15 likes in 15 minutes
You’re clearly using a proxy to vote numerous times for your own comment
@Chucky Arlaw: lol…it’s just “resting” in his account, where have we heard that before!!
@Chucky Arlaw: it is all a big conspiracy by the American evangelists. You need to get out more as you are displaying signs of extreme paranoia.
@Dee O’Connoll: I contributed to Amnesty’s campaign so nothing to do with Soros. He won’t be forcing you to have an abortion either.
@Dee O’Connoll: no paranoia, here’s an article from the Atlantic showing how American pro life groups have donated, at the very least, several hundred thousand euros; and that was 2013. Wonder how much they’re paying to meddle in our affairs now
https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/01/why-american-pro-life-dollars-are-pouring-into-ireland/266981/
@Dee O’Connoll: I’m not paranoid you are… FFS wake up.
@Dee O’Connoll: it was Father Ted, a show that parodied how hypocritical the Catholic church is. The same Catholic church that is pushing for a no vote!!
@Dee O’Connoll: Well considering you are an anonymous facebook troll with no discernable real identity, your comments don’t really carry much weight, for all we know you could be one of those foreign attempts.
@Dee O’Connoll: is ‘Dee’ just an alt-right talking point spewing bot?
@Dee O’Connoll: close but no cigar
@Chucky Arlaw:
OK Chucky, you can stop recommending yourself now.
Better late than never…
@KEV: Indeed, however as you’ve indicated I suspect much of the ‘damage’ has already been done and those opinions which could be influenced by social media adds already have been.
You only have to look at The Journal’s 8th Amendment Q&A Pregnancy Timeline from this morning, by and large it won’t have settled many arguements or changed many minds. Most will cherry pick from it to suit pre-existing mind sets, ignore it or just believe it’s wrong, in those areas that conflict with their beliefs, they’ll be happy to agree with it in all others.
I imagine we’ll see some other imaginative form of online advertising from Pro-Life supporters, I have my suspicions but I’d rather not give anyone any ideas. Just in case.
@Arch Angel: I’ve been seeing those ads online whenever I go on US current affairs sites for weeks now. Specifically about the 8th. Be interesting to see if they stop. I hope they would be inclined to put undecided voters off voting No. I loathe intrusive online advertising and I’m probably not the only one.
@Sandra Duffy: ok I just checked. The ads are still there. May be they haven’t started blocking them yet.
@Sandra Duffy: May I ask, when you say “US current affairs sites” are these viewed through your browser or do you view them through Facebook?
Oh dear, this is really going to effect the no compaign with their love boats slogan.
@Barry Somers: save the 8th/love both gave Opened their accounts to SIPO. The same can not be said for together4yes and their cohort.
@eric nelligan: you could always provide a citation which shows all the No campaigns adverts and Facebook use are legitimately funded, because it seems Facebook do not believe you. Never mind don’t trust politicians, don’t trust Eric Neliigan.
@eric nelligan: Care to share some links to reputable sources for that statement? I’m pretty sure together4yes would have no problems being audited
@John Mc Avinue: sure why would they when Leo is backing them
@Jonathan: That doesn’t even make any sense, but don’t let that get in the way of trying to associate Leo/politicians with the referendum.
@eric nelligan I’m still waiting for those links. Not too hopeful for any reply with reputable sources. Not the anti-choicers style
@John Mc Avinue: I think johnathan is a bot, user names with 8 digits tend to be bots that may be why it doesn’t make sense
In its statement, Facebook said that its move was in order to “help protect the integrity of elections and referendums from undue influence”.
Shows how much power and influence there is working behind the scenes. This referendum is way bigger than Ireland.
@Jonathan: “this referendum is way bigger than Ireland” are you acknowledging the suspicious nature of many vote no sites such as Undecided8?
@Paul Fahey: I haven’t seen any as I don’t use Facebook. I do find it very suspicious when people start censoring social media especially when they are not doing anything illegal.
@Jonathan: how is that censoring social media? It‘s not about content, it’s about advertising.
@Jonathan: It is illegal for foreign sources to donate large amounts of money and resources into trying to influence our democracy. With the constant barrage of No video ads that i’ve had to endure on youtube and on FB over the last few weeks, the No side must to have spent a absolute fortune on the advertising. I wonder how many of those ads will still be running now that foreign will still be appearing on people’s feeds.
The heavy advertiser through Facebook has been the Pro-Lie side from the US using Ireland as a proxy battle ground so as to outlaw abortion in every case, regardless of how compelling the reasons.
@Michael Lang: is it legal or not?
@Jonathan: Whether it’s illegal or not, It’s wrong.
@Jonathan: it‘s legal but so is Facebooks decision to stop it!
Anyway not everything that is legal is the right thing to do
Glad to see this happen… There should be serious consequences for the endless stream of lies from the pro life side
Good. There’s something fundamentally wrong with Irish citizens having to fly home to cast their influence on the referendum by voting, whereas groups stateside can influence the outcome with their wallets.
Great idea, across the board. Should also be extended to various other entities/ so called campaigns who use social media and forums to influence people- who may be vulnerable, easily influenced or desperate in other ways. Not before time.
The proof that foreign trolls are very active is that when an article is published that has anything to do with abortion there are hundreds of comments.
An article about the level of child neglect by their parents and children taken into care in Ireland numbering 6000 currently only attracts about 40 comments.
@Aine O Connor: check on the proabortion local heroes on this site ..they have almost no presence on any of the stories about the cervical smear scandal but they swarm all over any story about abortion ..check them out ..
@Matthew Henry: I doubt anyone on this site is “pro abortion”.
@Rob Cahill: check them out rob …even today they are on at least 3 stories and if you check the times they posted it means they have spent the full day on this site. thats every day ..whos paying them?
Good.
About time something was done about illegal funding by Soros and other nefarious foreign actors for the repeal lobby, money which has been funnelled into Facebook ads and other ads on digital media.
The handful of foreign-funded ads advocating for a No vote that a few repeal journalists made a big song and dance about were counterproductive for ‘Save the 8th’ anyway, not because of the adverse publicity, but because they were crap.
We’ve been having foreign interference in the abortion issue in Ireland since 2013 when BPAS put ads in the Irish Times and then uncle George funnelled the big bucks to repeal lobby groups starting in 2015.
@Emma Murphy: it’s not even illegal but I think it’s a good indication of how afraid the pro abortion powers are. To pull off something like this takes a lot of influence.
The problem with it is that Facebook get to censor what they don’t want us to see and how are we to know if they play fairly?
I’m actually amazing at how bizarre this is….correct me if I’m right but an American company wants to stop foreign powers from interfering in an Irish election. They couldn’t even help themselves from interfering.
What about campaigns and advocacy organisations from outside of Ireland?
@Rob Cahill: they can advertise abroad but not in Ireland to Irish resident Facebook users.
It’s very late but the main impact will be to limit the influence of the US based pro-lie side on the Irish Referendum.
Maybe the Journal then will ban all the foreign trolls who use this platform too.
@Aine O Connor: Just anonymous accounts would suit me.
Great – all we need now is to ban Ireland’s lefty liberal biased media coverage and we can all look forward to a fair and balanced debate.
@Brian Deane: I love how lefty liberal is used as an insult. Gone as thick as Americans in this country.
@Brian Deane: Funny how alt-right numpties love democracy until they start losing
That’s helpful, the issue I’m having is the LoveBirth ads constantly appearing on YouTube. I’d prefer to opt out of their ads altogether to be honest, I know their whole story, there’s not a think they could say to me to swing me back since I realised the no side is a religious – right stance and shouldn’t be in place.
Is it good thing?
@Seriously stunned: Depends on what they are censoring. But I’m sure they are on good terms with Leo and the lads with all those nice tax breaks.
@Seriously stunned: well
@Seriously stunned: well there’s a huge, evangelistic group who have been buying ads to prevent your Irish sisters from having control over their own body. Do you agree with that?
way too late anyway… either the foreign ads have been seen and shared either the money has been transferred to inside organisms/groups which will publish them as an inside job
That has taken a long time, nearly every post I opened started with a lovely French girl asking to save the 8th. Shutting the door after the horse has bolted methinks!!
have your say