June 3rd, 2010
03:53 PM ET
5 years ago

Facebook and YouTube launch election hubs

Facebook unveiled a new page highlighting how politicians and elected officials are using the site.
Facebook unveiled a new page highlighting how politicians and elected officials are using the site.

New York (CNN) - Facebook and YouTube Thursday launched hubs for campaigns tools candidates can use while gearing up to the next election cycle.

Facebook unveiled the "U.S. Politics on Facebook" page that will highlight how politicians, elected officials, and political campaigns are using Facebook.

The leading social network site has a "Facebook and Government" and "Congress on Facebook" page, which delivers interesting use-cases of Facebook being used to govern, as well as Facebook's targeted message to the politicians. "U.S. Politics on Facebook" will only highlight campaign uses, such as when Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty hosted the first "Facebook Town Hall" in late March.

To help candidates deliver their messages more effectively and directly, YouTube launched the "You Choose 2010 Campaign Toolkit."


You Choose provides campaigns six different tools, many of which did not exist during the last election cycle, to promote their candidate. Some of these tools include "moderator," which allows candidates to have a one-to-many dialogue on video and text from a YouTube channel, and "TV Ads," which enables campaigns to run 15- and 30-second targeted advertisements on professional programming and channels.

"Our goal is to help political campaigns get their messages directly to voters using the most compelling political medium on the web: video," YouTube's head of news and politics Steve Grove wrote in an e-mail to CNN. "We're excited to see how campaigns use them to inform and engage voters on the issues in 2010 that matter most."

Both products were launched during the Personal Democracy Forum, a conference which explores how technology is changing politics and governance worldwide.


Filed under: Facebook • Social Media • YouTube
soundoff (4 Responses)
  1. Nate

    Reg in Arizona you have done an excellent job of pushing your beliefs blaming the other side and calling for bipartisanship in the same comment. You are now qualified to join the current administration. Simply because someone disagrees on a reform idea doesnt mean they are denying there is a problem.

    June 3, 2010 04:40 pm at 4:40 pm |
  2. Sniffit

    Translation: Facebook figured out how to get its hands on some of that campaign donation money that gets thrown around.

    "Simply because someone disagrees on a reform idea doesnt mean they are denying there is a problem."

    Indeed. However, admitting there's a problem, failing to come up with any honest, sincere solutions of your own and merely sitting back to throw darts at everything anyone else produces...relying on the fact that you're the minority party, can vote against everything with supposed impugnity and essentially let the majority party "take the blame" for anything enacted...that's NOT acceptable. Period. Fake, three-page budget proposals and "chickens for chemo" are NOT acceptable. Fabrications about the contents of bills, such as "death panels" and "bailouts with taxpayer money" (when the bill clearly forced corporations to fund them) are NOT acceptable. Crying every time someone cites FACTS and EVIDENCE that shows your "tribe" has done nothing but fling its rotten ideological feces...NOT ACCEPTABLE. Own it or don't do it in the first place.

    June 3, 2010 04:55 pm at 4:55 pm |
  3. shadysider

    Nate – I don't really see a problem with Reg's analysis. Your indication of a 'beliefs blaming the other side' I would assume is pursuant to his statement of: "Scare tactics (re taxes) and appeals to selfish interests (re government spending) are the subterfuge they use but their direction is totally clear in wanting to return to more of the same that is then far more costly to the American people." I don't really have any problem of this analysis. If Conservatives/Republicans were able to articulate on their issues beyond calling Democratic plans 'socialist,' then maybe people would be more willing to listen to them. If Republicans are saying inane talking points full of red herrings (see Palin) people are going to move away from the party and vote Democrat, because at least they seem reasonable. (Once the 2008 elections went down, the GOP decided to be obstructionist – that's not an analysis – that was their political strategy – see Republican Governor's meeting) And when the majority vote Democrat and Democrats are in power, taxes are raised. So blame the inability to not go down the Limbaugh road as the reason for bipartisanship and Republican/Conservative losses.

    June 3, 2010 05:04 pm at 5:04 pm |
  4. anagram_kid

    Reg in AZ, great post!

    June 3, 2010 05:22 pm at 5:22 pm |