They’re All Ron Paul* Now

If nothing else, you can make Facebook & Politico your bitch this year.

If you’re on Facebook and plan on talking about the election this year, beware. Here is their plan for the 2012 election:

Facebook announced yesterday that “every post and comment — both public and private — by a U.S. user that mentions a presidential candidate’s name will be fed through a sentiment analysis tool that spits out anonymized measures of the general U.S. Facebook population.” This analysis, along with reader polls and other information, will in turn be shared with

This of course isn’t the first time Facebook has played fast and loose with your private information, and it won’t be the last. And it does pose some interesting question/problems:

This raises at least three concerns. The first is that many users may not want to be part of any “sentiment analysis” or poll. For example, they may be a firm supporter of Mitt Romney but find Ron Paul’s ideas interesting. Are they now going to feel hesitant to talk about Paul’s ideas out of awareness that it might be registered as support or boost a candidate they don’t like? Second, we don’t see any mention of user consent anywhere in Facebook’s announcement. How has Facebook decided that users agreed that their personal communications can and should be used in this way?

Finally, what other uses might this information be put to in the future? Will it be used to serve users ads from politicians or manipulate voting preferences in some way? We can see the marketing materials from Facebook now: “Candidates, serve ads to secret supporters! No one knows about their preferences except their closest friends and us.”

I’m also concerned about the prospect of Politico, known for their obvious support of Democrats and attacks on Republicans of every stripe, using the information to help/hurt candidates in some way. I don’t support Politico and as long as they play the partisan games they do (see Herman Cain), I won’t.

BUT! There is a way around this. We’re discussing it on the P&L Facebook fan page, and having some fun doing it. I suggested we come up with nicknames, but another user had a better idea. Per the commenter:

I’m just going to respond by calling every candidate RON PAUL.

And that’s just what we’ve been doing, to hilarious effect. Per another commenter:

I can’t wait for the State of the Union to see how Michelle matches the girls colors with hers and RON PAUL’S tie.

Per another:

I gotta go get me some RON PAUL at the grocery store and while I am at it, I should get some RON PAUL when I am at the hardware store. All I want for Christmas is RON PAUL.

We even got creative with Sarah Palin:


If enough people do this, or something similar, it will throw a monkey wrench in Facebook’s and Politico’s plans. They’ll have to sift endlessly through misleading data, if they are even able to. I encourage you to adopt a similar strategy while on FB this year.

This is an open thread. Pimp yo stuff.

*For Tribal Dufuses: This is not an endorsement of Ron Paul.

Cross-posted from Peacocks & Lilies.

About Woke Lola

Bitch, please.
This entry was posted in 2012 Elections. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to They’re All Ron Paul* Now

  1. Lola-at-Large says:

    Reminder: He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

  2. yttik says:

    LOL, I love that idea!

    I was talking to some kids about their complete murder of the English language, like texting, slang, FB, code words. They said it’s about privacy, about being the only ones who can understand the language they’re speaking, about not having their words stolen and used against them. Dang, I think the young-uns might be on to something! It really is kind of creepy, in this technology age, everything you say can and will be used against you, even without your knowledge.

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      Ah, so that is the point of my nieces’ shameful misspellings? I was wondering about that, but didn’t want to call them out in public for ignoring everything I’d taught them.

      Are you on Facebook, yttik? If so, don’t forget to like the P&L page! We need fans. 😉

  3. Anthony says:

    GREAT idea! Will do

  4. OldCoastie says:

    I’m not on fb and will not be, but this is just creepy.

    Speaking of creepy, Move On sent me my 1 millionth email (I can’t even get ’em to land in my junk box any more) with some title about how the R’s were trying to steal the election…

    I had a one paragraph rant in reply with mentions of May 31 and the tone of don’t EVER both me with this stuff and take me off your mailing list…

    Oddly, I have not had even 1 moveon email since… you think they are finally gone?

  5. DeniseVB says:

    Well, here’s Ron Pauline at the pulpit 😀 Does Jar-Jar know MLK was a Republican ?

    • elliesmom says:

      Shouldn’t that affect the tax exempt status of the church?

      “Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

      Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.

      On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.”

      • DeniseVB says:

        That’s what I thought. Especially that separation of church and state is so important on the left. Val Paul should know better.

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          Remember in 2004 when the left was suggesting that all those Sunday sermons that promoted Bush were in violation of the churches tax exempt status? I recall it pretty clearly. That may have been when IOKIYR was born. Now, apparently, IOKIYO.F.A.

  6. DandyTiger says:

    Great idea about they’re all Ron Paul now.

  7. Three Wickets says:

    This Slate article today is making the rounds. Project Dreamcatcher: How cutting-edge text analytics can help the Obama campaign determine voters’ hopes and fears

    Obama’s campaign has boasted that one of their priorities this year is something they’ve described only as “microlistening,” but would officially not discuss how they intend to deploy insights gleaned from their new research into text analytics. “We have no plans to read out our data/analytics/voter contact strategy,” spokesman Ben LaBolt writes by email. “That just telegraphs to the other guys what we’re up to.”

  8. Three Wickets says:

    Social media aids Romney to build momentum

    “The jig is up,” said Dan Siroker, a data scientist who worked for Mr Obama’s 2008 campaign and now runs his own analytics firm in San Francisco called Optimizely. “In 2008 we had a secret weapon that nobody knew about . . . That’s changed now in 2012.”

  9. DeniseVB says:

    Ruh, roh …. #occupyRonDCPaul won’t leave, via the snarky, oozing with irony, Jim Treacher…..

  10. Karma says:

    Pelosi’s daughter, Alexandra, was on an unnamed jerk’s show and had the nerve to discuss the Republican ‘civil war’ going on over Romney. As if Obama’s twin should somehow be the logical choice for Republicans and had a little video segment to prove the masses displeasure with TPTB’s choice. With the ending money quote of ‘eating their own’ in terms of their candidates.

    Of course, all I could think of was how someone who claims 20 years of being in political journalism/nepotism access could possibly miss the Democratic civil war her mother helped to create? Did Alexandra Pelosi just close her eyes, plug her ears, and sing lalalalala during the convention?

    Do they really not understand what they created 5/31/08?

    If she had a Twitter account I was going to join for the sole purpose of blasting her with Harold Ickes’ YouTube.

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      Interesting that she didn’t discuss the Civil War inside the Dem party, which has been going on since at least 2008, and has gained considerable momentum with the defections of the likes of Firepups, etc.

      • Karma says:

        Watching her HBO doc about Reps a while back inspired the same reaction. What about the Dems civil war? Except this time I went looking for her account. If she is really the objective documentary film maker then she should be able to point that camera at the Dems and see the same turmoil.

        She also complained about the damage Republican did to her last name during the 2010 campaign season. Alexandra should be more concerned about the damage her own mother caused. My complaints with Pelosi started in 2006 and it’s only gone downhill from there.

        It was hard to watch. Knowing that the Obama selection process is being mirrored in the Republican party with Romney. And these fools pretending they are giving an accurate representation of the political landscape.

        That Shawshank line about being deliberately obtuse comes to mind.

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      They do not understand. In their eyes Obama does not make mistakes. But he has made several. He may be good at outsmarting his colleagues and political opponents, but a huge faction of Dems and former Dems know exactly what went down in 2008, and they hate it as much as the corruption that went down in 2000.

  11. Three Wickets says:

    Little late now. Surprised conservative candidates weren’t making this point earlier.

    • DandyTiger says:

      Of course the funny thing for us disenfranchised Dems is that Romney is likely more liberal than Obama. Kind of funny really. A protest vote that turns out to also be a vote for the lesser of two evils.

  12. votermom says:

    I love contests & free stuff, and I keep thinking of getting a minimal FB account just to get into giveaways. Everytime I consider it, FB does something like this to make sure I stay away.

Comments are closed.