Let's Go Washington (Sponsored by Brian Heywood)(3): a 2022-2024 PAC: Alleged violations of RCW 42.17A.320 by failing to include proper sponsor identification for online political advertising (EY24 OCT24)

Case

#160776

Respondent

Let's Go Washington (Sponsored by Brian Heywood)

Complainant

Joe Kunzler

Description

• Allegation: Violations of RCW 42.17A.320 by failing to include proper sponsor identification for online political advertising

The Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) completed its review of the complaint filed by Joe Kunzler on October 14, 2024. The complaint alleged that Let’s Go Washington Sponsored by Brian Heywood (Let’s Go Washington or LGW) may have violated RCW 42.17A.320(6) and RCW 42.17A.350 by failing to include required sponsor identification on political advertising.

Applicable Laws & Rules

RCW 42.17A.320(1)

RCW 42.17A.320(6)

RCW 42.17A.350

WAC 390-18-030(3)

RCW 42.17A.005(15)(a)(i)

Background & Findings (For full background and findings, see case closure letter)

• Let’s Go Washington Sponsored by Brian Heywood is a political committee that was formed to support several initiatives to the Legislature during 2023, three of which appeared on the 2024 general election ballot, including I-2117, concerning the rollback of gas prices for vehicles. LGW also supported a 2024 initiative to the people concerning the use of natural gas that appeared on the 2024 ballot.
• Let’s Go Washington sponsored multiple ads supporting Initiative 2117, inviting readers to participate in gas price rollback events. The complaint identified several political advertising messages for the gas price rollback events posted on the social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter) that allegedly did not include proper sponsor identification.

Sponsor Identification for Ads Sponsored by Let’s Go Washington

• LGW stated that all Let’s Go Washington advertising cited in the complaint featured a pathway to sponsor identification information. LGW asserted that its X posts qualified as “small online advertising” as identified in WAC 390-18-030(3). LGW stated that, as a method offered in WAC 390-18-030(3)(b), when a viewer clicks on an X post the viewer is taken to the LGW X homepage, whose format is determined by X with limited editability. However, the top of the page includes a link to a page on LGW’s website where its postings on X are reproduced along with full sponsor identification and other required disclosures. The Respondent stated that the pathway works for all of the posts on X that were part of the complaint.
• Staff noted that filers using X for posting political advertising can put the required sponsor identification information on the bio page of X, thus meeting the one-click requirement in WAC 390-18-030(3).

Top 5 Contributors and Top 3 Non-Political Committee Contributors to a Top 5 Contributor

• The complaint appears to have also alleged that the Top 5 Contributors should have included Main Street Matters to Washington, a political committee that contributed $1,400,000 during the 12 months before the ads were presented to the public, instead of Brian Heywood who the complaint appears to state was not a Top 5 Contributor. The complaint further appears to have alleged that the sponsor identification for the gas price rollback events failed to include the Top 3 non-political committee contributors to Main Street Matters to Washington.
• However, during the 12 months before the political ads at issue were presented to the public, Brian Heywood made monetary contributions that were loans to Let’s Go Washington totaling $1,456,000, making Mr. Heywood one of the Top 5 Contributors.
• Because none of the Top 5 Contributors for the advertisements cited in the complaint were political committees, the requirement to list the Top 3 non-political committee contributors to a Top 5 Contributor is not relevant. 

Based on this information, the PDC dismissed this matter in accordance with RCW 42.17A.755(1).

However, pursuant to WAC 390-37-060(1)(d), PDC staff issued a formal warning concerning the Respondent’s failure to include proper sponsor identification for online advertising posted on the platform X in accordance with RCW 42.17A.320(1) and WAC 390-18-030(3), because the sponsor identification was not viewable with one click. For future online political advertising, staff expects the Respondent to make sponsor identification viewable with one click, for example, by including the sponsor identification on the bio page of X when posting future political advertising on that platform. The Commission will consider its formal written warning in deciding on further Commission action if there are future violations of PDC laws or rules.

Disposition

Case Closed with Written Warning

Date Opened

October 18, 2024

Areas of Law

RCW 42.17A.320, RCW 42.17A.350

Documents

• 160776 Let's Go Washington (Sponsored by Brian Heywood) Complaint.pdf
• 10-28-24 LGW Response to PDC Case No. 160776.pdf
• 160776 Case Closure Letter Respondent-Complainant.pdf