444
Remember, if you advertise on a Musk property and then decide not to advertise there anymore, he'll sue you.
Business genius devises plan to never get new advertisers.
“That’s a future supergenius Elon problem”, thought present supergenius Elon.
Meh. They disbanded because it wasn’t worth the trouble. Their members are still unlikely to advertise on X.
Exactly this. It makes no material difference, and it's more cost effective to dissolve the org and refashion than play biggest dick with a roid-raging billionaire on ketamine.
And the suit makes it even more unlikely for Twitter to get new advertisers. Why risk advertising on a platform where if you leave you will get sued?
The end of GARM marks a temporary victory for Musk and X CEO Linda Yaccarino, even though a judge hasn’t made a ruling yet.
Does it? Zero advertising dollars will be coming to x because of this, and its poisoning-the-well to any other companies that would even consider starting advertising with x for fear of retribution.
The signal to other advertisers is more of a victory than the case itself.
It isn't though - this is an industry group that helped vet platforms... given how Musk responds to people pulling their advertisements from the platform this is probably actually counter productive... also the Streisand effect.
The actual message is to not create a single entity that could be sued like this. Businesses can still get the same information and make the same decisions. Suing companies directly because they won't advertise on Twitter would itself be pointless and good for the lulz. But that's Twitter's next move. Will they hook us up? Popcorn is waiting.
I think that part of the problem for musk is that advertisers were paying attention to the findings and they may have influenced some to stop.
I mean, it'd be equally crazy, if not more, to think businesses that intend to advertise there indefinitely would pass up on the opportunity to market to millions of (mostly) morons
the fuck is x
No idea. Last I checked it was a letter of the alphabet. Microsoft used the letter as part of a name for a game console, but they weren't stupid enough to try to use a single letter for an entire name. Only a complete fucking moron would try to force some dumb shit like that onto the public.
Maybe they are referring to the social media company Muskrat bought and is driving into the ground by making it a haven for fascists. But that company was called Twitter.
SLAPP for me but not for thee.
meanwhile next month, "The new group World Alliance for Responsible Media, also known as WARM, is a voluntary ad-industry initiative..."
I wouldn't be surprised. Transfer the funds, dissolve the entity, so they don't need to waste money fighting frivolous lawsuits and open up under a different entity.
Half of white Musky is moving to Texas is it the lawyers will let anybody with enough money do whatever the hell they want. I don't think they have an anti-slap law at the state level either.
You would be looking for the Texas Citizens Participation Act. That's Texas' Anti-SLAPP law. No idea how it holds up in comparison to other states' though.
The Texas Anti-SLAPP law is pretty alright, but it doesn't extend to Federal suits.
Yarp, that's what's happenin to Coffezilla right now. Logan Paul is suin him for comments made in 2 videos an a tweet being critical of his refund plan for cryptozoo, or lack there of, and specifically did it in fed court to dodge the SLAPP it seems
They should call themselves twitter. The name isn't in use anymore.
GARM used to warn advertisers when their ads were being displayed next to objectionable material. With the warning system gone, Advertisers should now revert to a fail-safe state and stop using Xitter entirely.
Meanwhile, anyone still using Xitter should absolutely get in the habit of taking screenshots of ads next to heinous nazi bullshit, and then calling out the companies on why they support that kind of thing.
If you’re still using Twitter, you’re supporting this.
I doubt many, if any, on Lemmy, use Twitter.
You’d be surprised.
i wouldnt use twitter, BUT I CANT FUCKING READ ANYTHING ON IT WITHOUT AN ACCOUNT.
I WANT TO WATCH DON TRUMP JR SAY TIM WALZ DRINKS HORSE CUM FROM THE FIRST PERSON FOR FUCKS SAKE JUST LET ME READ THE DOGSHIT ON YOUR HORRIBLE WEBSITE.
i FUCKING hate this website.
nonprofit advertising group
Watdafuq is a nonprofit advertising group? I'm assuming they weren't just public service announcements...
Naw these things exist in every industry. At best, they coordinate compliance and best practices, but at worst they collude. It's a non-profit association of for-profit companies.
Just a way to structure an organization so folks don't have to pay taxes twice. You'd do the same to a lobbying organization.
And nothing of value was lost
No shit, non-profit? It's a consortium of the world's largest advertisers. You can hate Musk, and hate them at the same time. I would go so far as to say that's the only reasonable view on the matter.
Yep my thoughts exactly
The org's mission was to tell advertisers when they're advertising next to hate crimes. You really don't want advertisers to make money from ads next to hate crimes, because that incentivizes people posting nazi shit on social media. And this org would prevent that. It's not a bad thing.
Its disappearance won't really matter much because it's a paper fiction anyway, and there'll be another one.
And Musk has even managed to do a couple of worthwhile things in his life as well. I don't see why that means I should disregard every other terrible thing he has done, and will do.
Because that is your argument. That these gigantic advertising entities, who would destroy the world if it meant an extra 0.5% in their net revenue, are doing the world of service and we should be grateful for it.
I am not, fuck them. I hope all their key decision makers and Musk gather for settlement talks, and a meteor strikes square in the middle of the conference table.
Ok, fuck them. But shutting down this nonprofit organization doesn't directly affect their bottom line. It may eventually have an indirect effect.
My point is that by shutting down, the only obvious direct effect is that advertisements are now more likely to appear adjacent to bullshit hate propaganda. This doesn't substantially hurt the advertisers in a large way - it hurts people more because it elevates the visibility of hate speech. Why would you think that's good? This does absolutely fuck all to stop advertising or advertisers.
No, you don't understand.
The advertising entities, who definitely suck ass, would be MUCH WORSE and so would EVERYTHING ELSE if there wasn't someone telling them "don't put ads next to nazis". It's called harm reduction dude.
No, I understand.
Do you really think that if it wasn't for their consortium, companies would think "you know what? I think we should run ads next to Nazis".
Hint: No. They wouldn't.
So let me get this straight: you hate ad companies and want to cast them all into the fire (a position I agree with, fwiw);
but you also think they are ethical enough and competent enough to self-police running against nazi shit.
What
But they would end up running ads next to them more often. There are a lot of shitty industry groups. This is like the most banal, inoffensive one to get shitty about.
I really think you're missing the point here.
CNN is running a headline intentionally distorting the reality of what this group is. They're making it sound like Musk destroyed the Humane Society.
They want people to feel pity for the world's largest advertisers, or feel angry that Musk managed to slightly inconvenience them.
If you want to have a debate on the merits, you can't have it in an environment like that.
this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
444 points (97.2% liked)
News
23293 readers
5038 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS