Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey’s recent announcement of the platform’s ban on political advertising left many campaigns questioning, “What does this mean for me?”
Certainly, it means campaigns won’t be able to use Twitter as a medium with which to reach their voters in the 2020 election cycle, but below that obvious effect, what does Twitter’s ban on political ads really mean for campaigns large and small?
In the Big Picture, not much.
That’s right, Twitter’s ban doesn’t really create a dramatic effect on campaigns heading into 2020. Here’s why.
Twitter has never been the ideal platform for persuasion or motivation. That shows in their political ad sales, which have traditionally fallen far below that of Facebook and Google.
From the 280-character limit on tweets to the lack of targeting capabilities to its high level of anonymity of users, Twitter does not provide the best environment to deliver a targeted, persuasive message to a specific audience of voters, not like Facebook, Google or other non-digital mediums like direct mail.
What is Twitter good for? Twitter is good for sharing news or opinions. It is the preferred platform for the media, politicos and opinion leaders. That said, it was never the right platform to reach voters en masse.
All said, Twitter’s ban will not make the difference between a campaign winning or losing in 2020. Where and how a campaign chooses to spend their dollars and their ability to target specific groups of voters with specific messages will have a far greater impact.
Read more from Reid in AdWeek’s, “Twitter’s Ban on Political Ads Is No Big Deal, Marketers Say.”