The 2024 Election Battle Has Moved to Streaming, but the Rules are Barely There

Political campaigners have been spending billions of dollars on ads on streaming services, which promise to marry the persuasiveness of TV spots with the precision of digital targeting. What’s still missing from this winning combination is regulation. “The last time they passed a substantial law around campaign finance disclosure ... was McCain-Feingold in 2002,” said Ian Vandewalker, senior counsel and manager for the Brennan Center for Justice’s Elections and Government Program. “Streaming didn't exist.” Without disclosures about who is paying for a specific ad, there's an opportunity for foreign interference in U.S. elections, which is illegal. But more broadly, a system of checks has undergirded broadcast to bring some accountability to the networks and maintain a level of transparency with citizens. Streaming ads look the same, but they aren't governed by the same systems, seven sources told ADWEEK. A coming reckoning for who is liable The Federal Communications Commission requires TV and radio broadcasters—but not digital media companies—to submit daily reports of requests to buy political advertisements. Congress hasn't been able to pass legislation around political advertising outside of TV and radio, although other regulators have made some strides. The Federal Election Commission in 2023 began requiring all digital ads to have disclaimers (note: not disclosures), or notices played during an ad about who the spot was paid by. The new regulation defines these disclaimers as "communications placed for a fee on another person’s website, digital device, application, or advertising platform." Previously, the only digital medium covered in the FEC's disclaimer law were websites. Six U.S. states, including New York, Maryland, and Washington, passed laws about political advertising on digital since 2018, according to a 2023 report from the National Conference of State Legislatures. In addition to patchwork regulations, streamers do not have uniform policies on how they vet political ads, especially because streaming ads can be purchased programmatically via third-party adtech firms. “At some point, there's going to be a reckoning where that liability ... either moves up toward the candidate or campaign or moves down into the platforms that are ultimately executing advertising,” said Mark Langgin, CEO at media buying firm Green & Wood Media Services, which works with political clients. As regulators and industry leaders lag behind in making clear standards for connected TV, spending is only growing. Official campaigns and outside groups have dedicated more than $1.7 billion to advertising on streaming services between Jan. 1 and Oct. 15, according to advertising intelligence and analytics firm AdImpact. In terms of share of political ad spend, CTV has increased 7.8 percentage points compared to 2022, a larger leap than any other medium. Streamers disclose less than Meta and Google The disclaimers now required on streaming ads provide a measure of accountability, but it's not the most useful tool to track who is buying ads, especially compared to the disclosures broadcasters provide. Google and Meta operate ad libraries that show political ads that run on their platforms, following criticism they faced for their role in allowing foreign meddling in the 2016 election. Some streaming firms, like Roku and Samsung, have ad libraries, but it’s not common. Peacock and Hulu did not respond to questions about whether they offer an ad library, while a Max spokesperson said they did not offer one. Langgin said Meta and Google are far more transparent than the streaming ecosystem. Streamers would be wise to adopt self-regulation as Meta and Google have, said Cory Schnurr, head of global marketplace innovation at The Media Trust, which helps publishers vet political ads. “It’s better to be responsible now,” Schnurr said. “Look what happened with programmatic and privacy. We let that go for so long that it’s become an issue that has to be enforced upon us.” Fewer controls on who can buy a political ad Before the advent of automated advertising on CTV, campaigners who wanted to place a political ad had to call a TV station. The process for buying ads on streamers can be self-service and is often conducted via third-party adtech firms. This makes it easier for anyone, whether they are a legitimate political actor or allowed to run political advertisements according to U.S. laws, to run political ads. Spokespeople for Disney, NBCUniversal, and Warner Bros. Discovery said Hulu, Peacock, and Max all require humans to review political ads that air on their platforms. Roku said third parties that sell Roku's inventory vet ads according to their own policies, although Roku has the right to review or reject ads at its discretion (the Max spokesperson said ads purchased via third parties still must comply with Max's standards). Samsung did not respond to detailed questions about its vetting process. But determining that an ad is of a political nature is trickier in the age of digital, when many streamers and adtech firms offer self-service buying interfaces and buyers disclose the category of the ad themselves. The Interactive Advertising Bureau launched an Ads Product Taxonomy in 2022 where advertisers can flag their ad in the bidstream as political, but this standard is not widely adopted, Schnurr said. That’s why publishers and adtech companies pay companies like The Media Trust, which uses artificial intelligence to detect and flag ads that might be political. It can also be exploited. An employee on the political team of a large adtech firm said that a political advertiser was mis-declaring its ads in the IAB taxonomy as sports-related, which meant that the political ads went unvetted for a while. “If [federal] legislation were to come together, it would be a disaster for the industry,” the source said. “The industry has really gotten by on doing the bare minimum.”