For a party that regularly denounces “misinformation” and “disinformation,” Democrats certainly know how to use it to their advantage.
Harris’s campaign has been using Google ads that link to authentic news articles but with headlines and descriptions made up by her team. For example, an ad linking to NPR’s site says, “Harris will Lower Health Costs,” and another one linking to the Associated Press reads, “VP Harris’s Economic Vision – Lower Costs and Higher Wages.”
While these ads follow Google’s rules and are also used by other campaigns, some experts worry they might spread misinformation and reduce people’s trust in the media.
Research shows that only 32% of Americans trust the media.
Google’s ad transparency center shows that Harris’s campaign ads use content from various news outlets, such as Reuters, CNN, and USA TODAY.
USA TODAY’s spokesperson said they didn’t know their content was being used this way and stressed the importance of accurately and fairly sharing their stories. The AP also said they were unaware and wouldn’t allow such ads.
Trump’s campaign didn’t respond, but Google’s transparency center didn’t reveal similar ads from his campaign. Facebook banned similar ads in 2017 to fight “fake news” from the Trump administration.
Google mentioned that it’s common for ads to link to other sites. However, they added that these ads need to be labeled as sponsored and include a “paid for by” notice to set them apart from actual headlines.
Even though ads are labeled as sponsored, they raise significant ethical issues, according to Colin Campbell, a marketing professor. He says people might form opinions from altered headlines without reading the full articles. He noted that readers feel misled if they see a difference between the headline and the article.
While Google might be reluctant to ban these ads, Campbell believes news organizations should push to stop them to keep journalism “honest.”
As a marketing professor, Pinar Yildirim thinks linking to news sites is okay if the ad doesn’t mislead or use the publisher’s name unfairly. For example, movie trailers often use short quotes from reviews without causing issues.
But some outlets are outraged. One, WDAY Radio in North Dakota, is weighing legal actions following Harris’s manipulation of headlines to make it appear the station supported her.
WDAY’s president, Steve Hallstrom, criticized Google and the Harris campaign for the misleading ads. He felt insulted because the campaign used WDAY’s name and website to make it seem like their headlines said things they didn’t. He believes this deception harms their news brand.
The Harris campaign ran ads with different headlines linking to WDAY’s website. However, the headlines of the related articles on WDAY’s site didn’t match those in the ads. The content Harris posted as a teaser with her made-up headlines doesn’t appear in the articles, either.
Hallstrom said they never wrote the headlines used in the ads. Instead, he claimed the campaign mixed two unrelated stories from their website and changed some words to make it look like WDAY supported Walz’s selection.
Google said the ads followed their rules, but some didn’t have the proper sponsorship labels because of a “technical issue.”
But Hallstrom is having none of it. “I’ve heard the excuses about how this meets the approval of the Google Ad criteria people, and I don’t care,” he said.
Hallstrom questioned why the Harris campaign thought the ads were a good idea. He believes the ads are wrong, misleading, and careless. He’s surprised that anyone on the Harris team thought using such ads was a “smart or honest way” to promote their candidate.
Other news organizations, such as AP, Reuters, and The Independent, said they didn’t know their content was used this way. They argue that using fake headlines in political ads is misleading and want to remove them.
The scandal is unfolding at a time when some observant viewers have noticed that crowds at some of Harris’s campaign stops appear to be AI-generated. Snopes has called the claim false, and the Harris campaign denies it. But some photos reveal rallygoers with extra arms, blurred and identical facial features, and other suspicious characteristics.
While the jury is out on AI-generated photos, Harris uses other media manipulation to her advantage. It’s the best strategy Democrats have for winning the White House in November, other than fraud.
And the campaign hasn’t ruled that out, either.
