Following the failed assassination attempt on Donald Trump in July, various merchandise featuring Trump with a bloody face and fist raised started appearing on Facebook. These items included coffee mugs, Hawaiian shirts, trading cards, commemorative coins, and heart ornaments. Ads for these products used images taken at the scene by photographers Doug Mills and Evan Vucci, showing Trump yelling “fight” after the shooting. Even the Trump campaign itself offered merchandise commemorating his survival.
As the Secret Service investigated and law enforcement searched for a motive, online advertisers saw an opportunity to capitalize on the moment, targeting supporters hungry for merchandise. In the 10 weeks following the shooting, advertisers paid Meta between $593,000 and $813,000 for political ads explicitly mentioning the assassination attempt. While this revenue is a small portion of Meta’s overall ad revenue, the company has also seen increases in ad spending during times of conflict, such as the attack on Israel last year.
Critics question whether Facebook should profit from violence and whether this practice goes against the company’s own principles. Despite this, Meta spokesperson Tracy Clayton stated that all ads on the platform go through a review process and must adhere to the company’s standards.
The analysis also revealed that Meta made a significant increase in revenue from ads mentioning Israel following the attack compared to the year prior. Organizations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) were major spenders on these ads, with spending increasing over 300% in the six months after the attack on Israel.
While Meta claims not to profit directly from political violence, the review of Meta advertising data suggests that some businesses have made the assassination attempt a central part of their marketing strategy. For instance, a clothing company called Red First offered merchandise related to the assassination attempt through various Facebook pages.
Overall, the analysis highlights the complex relationship between social media platforms, advertising revenue, and real-world events, raising questions about ethics and accountability in the digital age.