[EL] Misleading GOP ad (Kyrsten Sinema)

Tue Feb 4 13:15:03 PST 2014

Anyone can get to any webpage by simply typing the url into the address bar
on their browser, or by clicking on a direct link from any of a plethora of
sources (from another webpage, in an email, even in a text message).  It's
easy to imagine how someone intending to swindle a contributor could easily
use this page to do so.

I do tend to agree with Tom that this is typical political expression.
These spoof sites are not unusual and can be effective.  But that is
somewhat beside the point, especially with regard to the solicitation of
contributions with very little context.  Phishing is a very real problem,
and anything that tends to discourage average citizens, who may not be
terribly tech-savvy, from making small-dollar political contributions
online (one of the very few ways to efficiently raise small-dollar
contributions) is bad for our political system.

Anyway, 11 C.F.R.102.14 is clear: An indication of opposition must appear *in
the title* of the communication, not in the text or on another webpage, if
the candidate's name is used.  These sites pretty clearly fail that test.
Especially in the context of soliciting contributions, that's a problem.

--
Steven Gold
General Counsel
ActBlue
steve at actblue.com
617.500.4175
www.actblue.com

We've moved! Please note our new address:
366 Summer St.
Somerville, MA 02144

On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:24 PM, John Tanner <john.k.tanner at gmail.com> wrote:

> Is there a way, other than using the link in the NBC article, that one
> reasonably could get to the contribute page without going through the first
> page?  I tried, but then others are more clever than I.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Thomas J. Cares <Tom at tomcares.com> wrote:
>
>> If you start at http://sinemaforcongress.com/ , it looks like
>> perfectly-legitimate political speech to me. I don't think the donate page
>> is trickery either. Making a sarcastic-negative ________forcongress.___
>> site for congressional candidates that also seeks contributions to that
>> candidate's opposing party doesn't seem inappropriate (but rather pretty
>> much in the spirit of the first amendment).
>>
>> -Thomas Cares
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, February 4, 2014, Jerald Lentini <jerald.lentini at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If nothing else, the NRCC's disclaimer almost certainly fails to meet
>>> the requirements of being clear and conspicuous. Language identifying the
>>> NRCC is entirely outside the white text box and is overlaid on top of a
>>> photograph. It has the least color contrast of any part of the page, and is
>>> more difficult to read than any other text.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 1:08 PM, <info at arizonaspolitics.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> (One) irony is that the NRCC trumpeted this back in November, and
>>> claimed that they were doing it because the "targeted" Democratic
>>> Representatives were "FRAUDS".
>>>
>>> My article: bit.ly/AZp736.
>>>
>>> Did further research and found that all 3 Arizona Dems in swing
>>> districts were targeted with this.  (www.AnnKirkpatrick.com,
>>> www.SinemaForCongress.com, and www.RonBarber2014.com)  And, in at least
>>> one of them, the word "Defeat" does NOT show up when the page comes up at
>>> 100% zoom.
>>>
>>> The search engine optimization apparently worked well on Rep. Barber.
>>>  The NRCC site comes up on page 1 of Google (when you search "Ron Barber
>>> 2014"), and the official site is on page 5.
>>>
>>> My article also lists the 14 Democratic Reps that I was able to find
>>> have been targeted in this way by the NRCC.
>>> _____________________
>>>
>>> Mitch Martinson
>>> www.ArizonasPolitics.com
>>> 602-799-7025
>>>
>>>
>>>  -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: [EL] Misleading GOP ad (Kyrsten Sinema)
>>> From: "Scarberry, Mark" <Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu>
>>> Date: Tue, February 04, 2014 10:06 am
>>> To: "law-election at UCI.edu" <law-election at uci.edu>
>>>
>>> It absolutely is misleading. If the reader misses one word ("Defeat"),
>>> the reader would think contributions would be used to support the Democrat.
>>> You don't have to click through to an obviously anti-Sinema site to
>>> contribute, nor is there any other indication of the ad's true purpose.
>>>
>>> Suppose there had been something conspicuous that would alert the
>>> would-be contributor, and the ad included a substantive criticism of
>>> Sinema. Would it be ethical to use the headline to get Sinema supporters to
>>> read the rest of the ad? My sense is no. It would be different if there
>>> were three question marks ("???") after the headline.
>>>
>>> Mark Scarberry
>>> Pepperdine
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> > On Feb 4, 2014, at 7:03 AM, "Joseph Birkenstock" <
>>> jbirkenstock at capdale.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Holy charge-backs, Batman... What's the non-"we're trying to trick
>>> donors" reason for putting "Kyrsten Sinema for Congress" at the top of that
>>> webpage?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ________________________________
>>> > Joseph M. Birkenstock, Esq.
>>> > Caplin & Drysdale, Chtd.
>>> > One Thomas Circle, NW
>>> > Washington, DC 20005
>>> > (202) 862-7836
>>> > www.capdale.com/jbirkenstock<http://www.capdale.com/jbirkenstock>
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Law-election mailing list
>>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Law-election mailing list
>>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>>  <http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election>
>>>
>>> --
>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail message, including any attachments,
>>> is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
>>> confidential and privileged information or otherwise be protected by law.
>>> Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If
>>> you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply
>>> e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140204/992e8310/attachment.html>