The Sticky Web Ads of Political Blogs
Report via Yahoo News
There seems to be a bit o knee-jerk going on in the 'sphere over FEC rules that would require that paid political advertisements on the Internet declare who funded the ad. A blog isn't a sacred entity that should be exempt from disclosing paid contributions.
The outcry is over draft rules from the FEC.
Draft rules from the Federal Election Commission, which enforces campaign finance laws, would require that paid political advertisements on the Internet declare who funded the ad, as television spots do.
Similar disclaimers would be placed on political Web sites, as well as on e-mails sent to people on purchased lists containing more than 500 addresses. The FEC also is considering whether to require Web loggers, called bloggers, to disclose whether they get money from a campaign committee or a candidate and to reveal whether they are being paid to write about certain candidates or solicit contributions on their behalf.
These rules would not affect citizens who don't take money from political action committees or parties.
Similar disclaimers would be placed on political Web sites, as well as on e-mails sent to people on purchased lists containing more than 500 addresses. The FEC also is considering whether to require Web loggers, called bloggers, to disclose whether they get money from a campaign committee or a candidate and to reveal whether they are being paid to write about certain candidates or solicit contributions on their behalf.
These rules would not affect citizens who don't take money from political action committees or parties.
I recall last fall there was an outcry among several large traffic blogs about the Dasche Vs Thune South Dakota Senate race. True they were being paid for blogging which is different in that ads are self-disclosing as Captain's Quarters pointed out.
In my opinion, bloggers who wish to do serious work should disclose all funding sources that could present a conflict of interest. In the case of DvT, clearly those payments cast a different light on their writing. Had Thune just bought blogads for their site, we would have seen the sponsorship up front and incorporated that information into our estimation of their credibility. The very fact that they chose not to disclose the payments or sponsorship in general now calls their motives and work into serious question.
But whether it is paid blogging or paid ads it is a political contribution. As this FEC rule would only include "paid" ads I have no problem with it at this point. Only when the rules talk about unpaid contributions are we falling down the slippery slope.
You can still include "unpaid" logos and ads for your favorite candidates without fear of the FEC. While it's less likely, bloggers paid substantially for an add may well be willing to place one for a candidate they do not support. To want disclosure for paid blogging but not paid political ads as is evident from past and present retoric is wanting your cake and eating it too.
Other opinions on the FEC draft ruling:
Dean's World
The American Mind
Scared Monkeys
Michelle Malkin