Hillary fabricates claim that her campaign paid more than Trump for Facebook Ads

gwb-trading · Feb 28, 2018

Another fabricated claim from Hillary flushed down the toilet.

Let's see the claim from her Tweet...

Now for the reality - Trump's campaign actually paid more for Facebook Ads

Facebook: Trump paid higher ad rates than Clinton during campaign
https://www.axios.com/facebook-trum...ads-6b58e6de-b7d1-477b-bf44-bda04264b182.html

Facebook is pushing back on a claim that was quoted by Hillary Clinton on Twitter that her presidential campaign was systematically charged more than twice that of the Trump's presidential campaign for advertising rates on Facebook. The company supplied data Tuesday showing that during the general election period, the Trump campaign paid slightly higher rates on most days rather than lower as has been reported.

https://twitter.com/x/status/968577962223136768

exGOPer · Feb 28, 2018

gwb-trading said:
Let's see the claim from her Tweet...
Facebook is pushing back on a claim that was quoted by Hillary Clinton on Twitter that her presidential campaign was systematically charged more than twice that of the Trump's presidential

So she quotes a tweet and that's her 'fabricating' a claim. She didn't claim anything, can you even read.

Also the 'claim' was made by Wired and the FB tweet doesn't clear it up

Wired story seems to specify Clinton was charged more to reach the *same* swing-state voters. So this doesn’t negate the story: “During the run-up to the election, the Trump& Clinton campaigns bid ruthlessly for the same online real estate in front of the same swing-state voters”

https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-trump-clinton-campaign-ad-cpms/

gwb/ET_Hannity crashes and burns again fabricating and deflecting

gwb-trading · Feb 28, 2018

exGOPer said:
So she quotes a tweet and that's her 'fabricating' a claim. She didn't claim anything, can you even read.

Also the 'claim' was made by Wired and the FB tweet doesn't clear it up

Wired story seems to specify Clinton was charged more to reach the *same* swing-state voters. So this doesn’t negate the story: “During the run-up to the election, the Trump& Clinton campaigns bid ruthlessly for the same online real estate in front of the same swing-state voters”

https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-trump-clinton-campaign-ad-cpms/

gwb/ET_Hannity crashes and burns again fabricating and deflecting

Re-Tweeting this nonsense as if it is a fact with a spew about social media platforms & democracy saying the problem needs to be addressed --- is fabricating the claim.

So much to the point that Facebook had to come out and directly call it bullshiat.

Cuddles · Feb 28, 2018

This is a non story

gwb-trading · Feb 28, 2018

Here4money said:
This is a non story

Until Hillary and liberals made it a story.... then it blew up in their faces.

exGOPer · Feb 28, 2018

gwb-trading said:
Re-Tweeting this nonsense as if it is a fact with a spew about social media platforms & democracy saying the problem needs to be addressed --- is fabricating the claim.

So much to the point that Facebook had to come out and directly call it bullshiat.

But it is not nonsense, she didn't 'claim' that the overall cost of FB ads were higher, she 'claimed' that it was higher in swing states which has not been proven 'nonsense'.

And the 'claim' was made by a well researched Wired article, you may want to read it before jumping to conclusions.

exGOPer · Feb 28, 2018

gwb-trading said:
Until Hillary and liberals made it a story.... then it blew up in their faces.

The only one blowing hot air is you, you are utterly confused about the claim, who made it and that the fact that it was not refuted.

Tough luck.

gwb-trading · Feb 28, 2018

exGOPer said:
The only one blowing hot air is you, you are utterly confused about the claim, who made it and that the fact that it was not refuted.

Tough luck.

Let's establish some reality -- the What Facebook isn't saying about Trump and Clinton's Campaign Ads article from Wired yesterday retracts their earlier assertions made in the How Trump Conquered Facebook - Without Russian Ads article -- all while trying to foster some nonsense that Facebook's system prioritizes more provocative or outrageous political ads in a poor attempt to re-direct how flawed and incorrect their assertions were about Hillary's Facebook Ad rates vs. Trump's rates.

exGOPer · Mar 1, 2018

gwb-trading said:
Let's establish some reality -- the What Facebook isn't saying about Trump and Clinton's Campaign Ads article from Wired yesterday retracts their earlier assertions made in the How Trump Conquered Facebook - Without Russian Ads article -- all while trying to foster some nonsense that Facebook's system prioritizes more provocative or outrageous political ads in a poor attempt to re-direct how flawed and incorrect their assertions were about Hillary's Facebook Ad rates vs. Trump's rates.

First of all,that's not how retractions work, retractions are published at the end of the same article after 'retracting' the erroneous part.

Second, the subsequent article is talking about something else, aka social media strategy, not the costs for it to be the 'retraction' of some other article. Different subjects entirely.

jem · Mar 1, 2018

anyone who markets on social media understands that you have to try to figure out the algos and use them to your advantage. Apparently Trumps people did that masterfully.

hillary's tweet was designed to mislead her mostly uniformed base.