Confusion reigns on rules over political advertising rules and social media

Considerable confusion arose over how dated electoral laws on political advertising should be applied to social media, after a number of Canberra Liberals posted anti-light rail campaign material.

The posts had lacked any authorising statement, which clarifies that the content has come from a paid member of parliament or political party.

That prompted ACT Electoral Commissioner Phil Green to write to Opposition Leader Jeremy Hanson, and Liberal MLAs Nicole Lawder and Giulia Jones, warning them that the images must include an authorising statement within the image itself.

It was feared that if the image was posted by a politician but shared by others, it would no longer be clear where the content had originated.

But that advice changed on Friday, after further research by the electoral commission.

Mr Green wrote to the Liberals again, telling them that they did not need an authorising statement on such material, so long as it was still clear who had originally posted it.

That would be readily apparent in most circumstances on Facebook and Twitter, he said, because of the way content was shared.

For example, if Mr Hanson were to post an anti-light rail graphic on his Facebook page, and others shared it, it would still be clear that Mr Hanson was the original poster, and that he was doing so in his capacity as a member of the Legislative Assembly.

Mr Green appeared in estimates just hours after providing that new advice.

"We're making up the rules as these things change and evolve to try to make the Electoral Act, which was written in the 90s, fit things that are happening in 2016," he said.

"We've reached the view that as long as a thing that is shared from place to place identifies the originator of the material, and that readers of the material are aware of who has originated things … that's sufficient for the readers to have an indication of who the author of the material is."