The Fractured Landscape of Competitive Digital Data
Recent opinion pieces and articles have discussed the ability to avoid disclosing the details of digital political buys, and it’s understandable why that could be seen as a benefit to certain campaigns.
But that approach ignores the fact that the ability to accurately track political competitive in a timely fashion can be a positive factor when deciding what digital partners to work with.
Through our unique political practice, my company has been able to provide expertise to clients on how to navigate increasingly long and tumultuous election cycles. We’ve also been steadfast in our calls for additional transparency when it comes to digital political ads.
Having conflicting sets of federal and state regulations, combined with different platform-specific approaches to self-regulation, has created a confusing and opaque system that’s not equipped for increased spend on digital political ads.
When seeing a political ad during Jeopardy! or their local news, voters don’!t make a distinction based on how they’re watching TV (broadcast, streaming, etc.), but the current regulations do. Unfortunately, regulations tied to how someone accesses programming weren’t built for an era where the line between broadcast and streaming would be as blurred as it is today.
In today's increasingly digital world, the fractured landscape of competitive digital data presents a serious challenge to conservative campaigns that are often fighting an uphill battle against tech giants with left-leaning biases. The lack of transparency in how data is collected, shared, and used for targeting voters leaves conservative campaigns at a disadvantage. As conservatives, we must push for free-market solutions that level the playing field, ensuring all campaigns have fair access to digital tools and voter data. Without this balance, we risk ceding the digital battleground to those who would manipulate data for partisan gain rather than respecting the democratic process.
~Political Media