Online political advertising has grown rapidly over the last two decades and played an important role in campaigns and elections. Arising with it are concerns around issues such as data privacy and transparency, which have sparked calls for regulation. Whilst change has begun to be implemented, in many contexts moves to regulate online political advertising have been limited. In this article, we explore one such case, asking whether attempts to regulate have been hindered by the particular characteristics of digital technology or by wider political factors. Presenting new interview data examining the experiences and perceptions of regulators, policy makers, civil servants, civil society groups and academics in the United Kingdom, we distil three barriers: political reticence, logistical challenges and conflicting policy proposals. Our findings suggest that efforts to regulate online phenomena need to apply a media and politics-centric lens, considering how the technological traits of digital media and political factors can affect efforts to regulate.

No abstract

Online political advertising is often portrayed in a negative light, yet there is limited evidence about what exactly the public deems unacceptable about it. This paper provides new insights into public attitudes through an online survey where 1,881 respondents evaluated all political ads placed on Facebook during the 2019 UK General Election. We find that citizens do not inherently think political ads are problematic. Examining two possible regulatory responses, first, we find that compliance with existing regulatory protocols for non-political advertising is a strong predictor of political ad acceptability, suggesting a case for extending the existing regulatory regime to include political ads. We also find that people had particular concerns about the content and tone of unacceptable ads, highlighting the value of codes of conduct to promote good practice. Overall, this paper offers a nuanced account of attitudes towards online political advertising and identifies possible pathways for regulatory reform.

Despite British and European policymakers’ quest to regulate online political advertising, it is not clear what exactly constitutes an online political advert. As with many areas of digital governance, it is therefore necessary to impose definitional criteria, yet the process of doing so is by no means straightforward. Using qualitative interviews, we set out to clarify alternative routes for definition by distilling policymakers’ understanding of what it means for a piece of content to be an ‘advert’, ‘online’, and ‘political’. Presenting a series of decision trees that trace policymakers’ ideas, we reveal different traits that could be used to create a definition. In addition, we use our interviews to offer insight into the policymaking approach needed when defining complex and contested digital phenomena. Given the array of possible definitional approaches, we argue that policymakers will find it valuable to adopt an argumentative and communicative approach if efforts to gain consensus are to succeed (Majone 1989). This article accordingly provides a practical tool for future attempts to define online political advertising, and casts light on the strategies policymakers may use when seeking to define and regulate complex digital phenomena.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.