General election: Facebook says it would not ban doctored Conservative campaign video

Facebook would not have blocked the controversial video doctored by Conservatives to make it look as though Labour’s Brexit spokesperson could not answer a question about his own policy, the tech giant has said.

The platform’s founder Mark Zuckerberg has resisted pressure to follow Twitter in banning paid political advertising, and Facebook is also insisting it will not get involved in deciding what politicians should or should not be allowed to say.

The company also said that UK electoral law “needs to be brought into the 21st century” so that platforms and those who use them are clear about what is permitted.

An executive said that the “ferocious public debate” over the distribution of the Sir Keir Starmer video on Twitter earlier this week was an indication of society’s ability to sniff out false information.

The edited video showed Labour's Brexit spokesperson apparently struggling to answer a question on how the party would secure a fresh deal from the EU, while the unedited footage shows him answering immediately.

Facebook has a team of 500 working on ensuring its service is not abused in elections around the world by foreign actors attempting to disrupt the democratic process or others spreading false information.

The company said it had not so far found any evidence of foreign interference in the campaign for the UK’s 12 December election, but said: “We are looking.”

Facebook's searchable Ad Library allows the public, rival parties and the media to scrutinise paid-for posts by participants in election campaigns, as well as information about which areas of the country or gender they are aimed at – but not the more detailed data which allows parties to hone in on specific interest groups for micro-targeted messages.

The site also announced new procedures to require those setting up political information pages to reveal their identity – or face being removed.

Facebook’s UK head of public policy, Rebecca Stimson, said that it was for politicians and regulators and not private companies to determine the rules on what political advertising should be permitted.

“We have long called for new rules for the era of digital campaigning,” said Ms Stimson.

“Questions around what constitutes a political ad, who can run them and when, what steps those who purchase political ads must take, how much they can spend on them and whether there should be any rules on what they can and can’t say – these are all matters that can only be properly decided by parliament and regulators.

“Legislation should be updated to set standards for the whole industry – for example, should all online political advertising be recorded in a public archive similar to our Ad Library and should that extend to traditional platforms like billboards, leaflets and direct mail?

“We believe UK electoral law needs to be brought into the 21st century to give clarity to everyone – political parties, candidates and the platforms they use to promote their campaigns.

“In the meantime, our focus has been to increase transparency so anyone, anywhere, can scrutinise every ad that’s run and by whom.”

Politicians are barred by Facebook’s “community standards” from spreading misinformation about where, when or how to vote; inciting violence; sharing content that has previously been debunked as part of its fact-checking programme; or violating local laws.

But Ms Stimson rejected calls for the company to check political ads for accuracy, saying: “We don’t believe a private company like Facebook should censor politicians. This is why we don’t send content or ads from politicians and political parties to our third-party fact checking partners.”

She added: “In general, we believe political speech should be heard and we don’t feel it is right for private companies like us to fact-check or judge the veracity of what politicians and political parties say.”