Why do we allow false and misleading political ads? Why do we allow politicians to blatantly lie to us? And is it time to put a stop to it?
Today, advertisements for cars, stereos, computers, shoes, drugs — everything that matters to us — must be truthful. Misleading or outright false ads violate federal law and can result in severe consequences. We expect and demand that when we buy something based on an advertisement, the product is what the ad says it is. And mostly, that’s what we get.
How did this happen? Well, it started over 110 years ago when “patent medicine” makers were committing rampant fraud, and even killing Americans with unsafe products. Journalist Samuel Hopkins Adams published a series of exposé articles showing that these products were at best useless (many were simply alcohol) and at worst harmful or deadly.
His articles, along with many others, helped Americans wake up to the fact that advertisers often have few moral constraints when it comes to their ads. Too bad if their customers lost money, were injured, or even died. The ads sold the product.
So America took action. Adams’ articles (and others that followed) ultimately led to the establishment of the Federal Trade Commission in 1914, which was tasked with protecting American consumers from fraud. And it worked.
So why do we expect the government to protect us from false product advertising, but allow rampant false advertising in our elections? Why do we allow the very politicians who run our government to lie in their ads? Do we not care about democracy itself?
Is truth in the democratic process less important than truth in a McDonald’s hamburger ad?
When it comes to the most important topic of all, our democracy, lies are rampant and utterly unpunished. A politician can say anything at all, and there are no legal consequences. We are protected when buying shoes, aspirin, or a house. So why is the President of the United States allowed to lie about his opponent, obviously and without consequences, to the American public?
Political lies are certainly nothing new; they have been woven into the fabric of American politics since day one. Check out Lying in State: Lies, Lies and More Lies — A Presidential History for a brief and fascinating account. Lying to get elected or stay in power is nothing new. In fact, many might argue that political lies are just part of the process, and that lying politicians will ultimately get their justice by being voted out of office.
But the liars of the past don’t hold a candle to what’s going on today. Political lies now threaten the very fabric of American democracy.
The problem is that lies, which have always been a problem, are now being vastly amplified and distorted by technology, far beyond anything we could have conceived of a few short decades ago. Technology has simply overtaken society’s ability to cope with political lies.
Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, WhatsApp and other social media amplify lies outrageously and with great effect. Moreover, the internet has created “echo chambers,” groups of like-minded people who reinforce one another’s viewpoints and ignore alternate views. These echo chambers are a brand new social structure that couldn’t even have existed before modern social media. Until recently, people mostly socialized at church, school functions, and neighborhood get-togethers, usually with friends and neighbors of all persuasions. The people in your social circles were the people in your town, not someone thousands of miles away, and a wide range of views was the norm. People used to listen to all viewpoints, usually with respect.
But with the advent of the internet and social media, those days are over. Social intercourse knows no geographical boundaries. Where once we had a few thousand people we might interact with, now we have seven billion. And technology, rather than expanding our consciousnesses, has allowed people to build themselves a bubble of self-reinforcing viewpoints.
This, combined with a politician’s “license to lie,” has created whole alternate realities: millions of people not only don’t know the facts, but believe vast, breathtaking (and utterly false) conspiracy theories. The echo chambers in which they socialize ensure that their world view, however absurd and detached from reality, is never challenged.
We can’t change human nature. But we can change one of the worst contributors to these false alternate realities: Political advertisements that contain lies.
I propose that we’re long overdue for a truth-in-advertising law for politicians. I see three critical areas that must be addressed if our democracy is to survive:
- Ban straight-out factual lies, such as falsely claiming an opponent is a criminal, or “Obama was born in Kenya.”
- Ban audio and video clips of a politician that are taken out of context or altered in a way that clearly changes or reverses their meaning.
- Ban all ads that contain “deep fake” audio and video clips, where a computer generates the voice and/or image of a politician. (If you’ve never seen this, check out this deep fake of President Obama giving a speech he never made.)
Clearly the law needs to lean heavily in the direction of free speech, as do all exceptions to the First Amendment. Politicians should be able to express beliefs and predictions, and offer opinions and analysis. But we need to distinguish between opinions and facts. “Joe Biden is a socialist” is an absolutely legitimate opinion. But “Chinese communist bankers approved millions to go to [Hunter Biden’s] firm” is simply a lie, and it should be illegal to publish an advertisement with this claim.
I can already hear shouts of “First Amendment!” And I get it. Free speech is at the foundation every viable democracy. But free speech is not unlimited and has never been. There are a number of important categories where speech can be constrained by the government, including “obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, true threats, and commercial speech such as advertising.” And importantly, in 1974 the Supreme Court ruled that there is “no constitutional value in false statements of fact.” Although the subject is complex, the Court essentially said that false statements are simply not protected free speech.
A law requiring truth in political advertising would simply extend these exceptions to the most important “product” of all: democracy.
It’s important to understand why we have these exceptions to the First Amendment. Without these limitations, it would be legal to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater, to publish sexually explicit movies of children, to ignore copyright laws, or to yell “Kill the cops!” on a megaphone during a riot.
These categories of speech are banned because society would be seriously damaged if they were allowed. In most cases, such speech serves no legitimate purpose that counterbalances that damage.
And so it is with political lies: their only purpose is to deceive voters, and by doing so they damage society, the democratic process, and the government itself.
And the lying, along with the damage it’s causing to our democracy, is only going to get worse. Because sadly, the technology forces that have amplified this societal sickness are getting worse, not better.
It’s time we do something about it.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks