Online Political Ad Spending Reaches $1.9 Billion for 2024 Elections
In the lead-up to the 2024 elections, political advertisers have spent a reported $1.9 billion on online ads across four major digital platforms: Meta, Google, Snap, and X. This figure, derived from an analysis by the Brennan Center, OpenSecrets, and the Wesleyan Media Project, represents the most comprehensive account of online election spending to date. However, it remains an incomplete estimate due to the lack of mandatory disclosure laws, with some platforms providing no data and others offering inconsistent and partial information.
Differences in Advertising Strategies
The examination of political advertising content shows differing strategies among various groups. Outside groups and parties predominantly utilized negative ads aimed at persuasion, whereas candidates split their advertising objectives between voter persuasion and fundraising. Democrats and Republicans also diverged in their spending approaches. Democratic spenders focused more on fundraising, while Republican spenders were more inclined toward get-out-the-vote efforts. Additionally, Democrats allocated a larger share of their budget to contrasting party candidates with opponents, unlike Republicans who concentrated more on promoting their own candidates.
The Challenge of Transparency in Political Advertising
Analyzing online political advertising is challenging due to insufficient disclosure regulations. The data provided by tech companies is voluntary, lacks standardization, and may omit significant details. With the rise of online political activity and the increase in dark money, there is an urgent call for enhanced transparency and regulation in this domain.
Platform Spending Breakdown
Among the platforms, Meta (including Facebook and Instagram) led with over $1 billion in political ad revenue, followed by Google at $846 million. Snap and X reported considerably lower figures, with $27 million and $24 million, respectively. However, these numbers likely underrepresent actual spending due to varying data quality across platforms. Investigations have uncovered political ads omitted from platform ad libraries, such as a report that prompted X to disclose revenue from political ads 50 times higher than initially claimed.
Opaque Influencer Payments
A growing trend in political advertising is the payment to social media influencers, which lacks transparency. These payments are not classified as traditional ad buys and therefore are not disclosed by platforms, advertisers, or influencers themselves. As social media influencers increasingly disseminate news, this form of spending becomes vital for political messaging. Over a quarter of digital content creators were reportedly approached to promote political content in 2024. The Democratic National Committee and the Harris campaign together spent more than $4 million on influencer-focused firms, while pro-Trump group Turning Point USA collaborated with numerous online creators. Payments to influencers, based on account following and engagement, can range significantly, reaching up to $100,000 for influencers with vast followings.
Impact on Political Transparency and Accountability
The rise in influencer-related spending enables anonymous election influence by large spenders. A notable incident involved a coordinated attempt to discredit Harris through unfounded allegations, with participants receiving substantial compensation. The Department of Justice has alleged Russian operatives channeled $10 million to Tenet Media, which promoted right-wing content. With dark money setting record highs, the lack of transparency around these financial flows obscures voters’ understanding and heightens the potential for electoral manipulation.
Insights from Meta Ad Content Analysis
A pioneering analysis of Meta’s political advertising content pertinent to federal races highlighted key differences in candidate and group strategies. Candidates primarily used ads to promote themselves (57% of their spending), whereas outside groups and parties favored negative ads. This tendency was reflected in nearly two-thirds of the spending by outside groups (65%) and significant proportions by national (59%) and state/local parties (56%).
While candidates balanced fundraising and voter persuasion in their spending (42% and 43% respectively), parties and outside groups concentrated their expenditures on persuasion, with only a minimal focus on get-out-the-vote initiatives.
Partisan Variations
Republican and Democratic spenders showed distinct advertising preferences. Republicans allocated more funds to candidate promotion (63% vs. Democrats’ 53%) and get-out-the-vote efforts (23% vs. 9%), while Democrats invested more in fundraising (38% vs. 15%). In terms of ad tone, Republicans preferred positive promotions, whereas Democrats emphasized contrast ads. Both parties allocated a similar portion of their budgets to attack ads.
Methodology
The analysis utilized political ad data from Google, Meta, X, and Snap, covering the period from January 1, 2023, to November 9, 2024. Data sources included Google’s Transparency Reports, Meta’s Ad Library Reports, and disclosures from X and Snap. Due to data limitations, particularly regarding ad sponsor identification, the analysis primarily focuses on platform-level totals.
For the Meta content analysis, ads were classified based on tone and goal, utilizing keyword searches and metadata analysis. Ads were evaluated for their promotional, attack, or contrast nature, and goals were categorized as fundraising, persuasion, or get-out-the-vote efforts through computational classification methods.
