I understand that when the result are tight it’s important to be fully transparent, but the election looser always have an excuse (It’s FB, it was too sunny so people went picnic, etc...)
I’m speaking generally, not on this specific election. Just wondering what future elections result will be
Well, with regards to this specific "referendum", there was a landslide in favour of repeal (of the 8th Ammendment to the constitution, which blanket banned any and all abortion under all circumstances). All polling and subsequent analysis suggest that there was nothing untoward with this result.
However. This was a hugely divisive topic, as you might expect, and it attracted a huge amount of attention from oversees.
Complaints have been made on both sides of the campaign about interference by foreign actors, in particular well-funded ones buying and targeting ads.
That Facebook gave an undertaking to stop running ads, came to naught since they continued to run the ads because who can say no to that kind of money right?
What Irish people want to know is "who" and to what degree outside forces were trying to interfere with the democratic process here. How much money was being spent, and, to understand definitively which side was doing more meddling, because there's been a fair amount of mudslinging the last six months or so.
It's that hidden funding that scares me. Whether it's massive spending by mega-corporations or targeted ads by foreign intelligence agencies. We can't understand how our democracy is being affected unless we know who is behind the money.
In terms of shaping views, welfare was designed to allow single mothers to stay home and raise their kids. Yet by twisting the issue people no longer support the idea.
Unions are no longer seen as something that helps 'you', they now help 'other' people.
In other words people might vote yes, yet at the same time prefer it not come up for a vote.
Tens of millions of dollars keep it in the forefront of your brain. There is no accident here. There is no "simply comes up"
I'm suspicious of some topics and the support they get myself, but your approach here seems much too fast to dismiss a topic that maybe you don't like. It's way too easy to just say something is not organic or illegitimate when the issue is unpleasant rather than really deal with it. I don't know if anyone has a good way of getting their finger on legitimate, or topics that are more "important" than others in a democracy.
But it's very clear to me that it's an artificially promoted issue that plays on people's emotions.
Divisive issues are not accidents. They're focusgrouped and marketed with extreme care.
I don't think I understand what you're saying. There can't be divisive issues?
Really, it's more than just being divisive that's at issue. At core you need to consider two factors.
1. Strong minority support vs general but weak opposition
2. Minimal direct impact
The point is these things both provide support and distractions. But, when one side gets into power they don't actually try and change much.
what will happen now?
For example, maybe we're worried foreign governments / billionaires are using facebook ads to influence our elections. Maybe the data will be good news, proving that this hasn't happened.
And if the evidence shows it has happened, we'll be in a more informed position to discuss fixing it.
But targeted online advertising is a brand new thing in the political world. Data like this will be essential for academics to study the effect of this kind of advertising on an election.