109

Elon Musk launches profane attack on X advertisers (www.bbc.co.uk)

submitted 8 months ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/globalnews@lemmy.zip

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Archived version: https://archive.ph/MbUXN
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20231130090524/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67574396

all 36 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] athos77@kbin.social 56 points 8 months ago

"What this advertising boycott is going to do is it's going to kill the company," he said.

Nobody owes you anything, you idiot. Businesses have the right to decide not to advertise with you, people have the right not to go to your platform, groups have the right not to host their content there. Your business was a convenient and vaguely congenial place for everyone to meet, but that's not true anymore.

[-] GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 8 months ago

They only want a market that's free for them.

[-] beebarfbadger@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

"My free speech! Wait, free speech is when everybody is forced to listen to me, then forced to agree with me enthusiastically and then forced to give me money for what I said, right?

Right?"

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Also yes it’s going to kill the company. Boycotts against company owners aren’t meant to be “please sir stop being a piece of shit” they’re meant to hurt. They’re meant to send a clear and painful message, and ideally create room for a less piece of shit alternative to succeed

[-] PaupersSerenade@sh.itjust.works 50 points 8 months ago

"The whole world will know those advertisers killed the company, and we will document it in great detail," he added.

Absolute spoiled bratt, nothing is his fault.

[-] Vlyn@lemmy.zip 42 points 8 months ago

At this point there is zero doubt left that Musk is an idiot.

All he did was being born rich and being lucky with his investments so far.

[-] steakmeout@lemmy.world 28 points 8 months ago

Yeah he’s sorry for the tweet…now. Not when he posted it, not when people complained but now - when the consequences hit and it cost him money.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

And not even then. When it became so much money it might sink his ship. When he thought he could weather it until it passed he tried lashing out without apologizing.

And also yeah he’s apologizing about the antisemitism and racism. But he’s not apologizing about the other bigotry. Only the bigotry that was able to gather enough backlash to actually hurt him

[-] halferect@lemmy.world 21 points 8 months ago

What a spoiled brat

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 18 points 8 months ago

Elon seems more and more like an escaped mental patient....

I think the stress is really getting to him, I feel kinda bad for him actually....

Or, I would feel bad for him, if he wasn't a complete dickhead.

[-] SapphironZA@lemmings.world 5 points 8 months ago

He's in the early stages of turning orange.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

I’m not thinking mental patient but rather the panic attack of someone who set themselves on fire by trying to shoot a bottle rocket out of their ass while so drunk they’re barely standing. It’s the insanity of many bad decisions that he could have avoided coming together to create an emergency and him not being in a position to step back and rationally triage himself but rather going by gut instinct to try to fight the firefighters

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 3 points 8 months ago

Yeah, I can see that, I wonder what will happen when he crashes and burns, when the Elon bubble pops, as from what I can tell it is just a matter of time...

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

He’ll still be a billionaire thanks to his other companies which are harder for him to rapidly kill. I see him having either the Lindbergh experience or the notch experience. Notch is still around, rich as fuck, massively bigoted, and extremely unpopular not just with society as a whole, but like in a doesn’t have friends way. But Lindbergh, he was a lot like musk until he ran for nazi president of America and was pretty popular until everyone who had supported him had to pretend they didn’t.

So yeah, either rich fascist who’s so lonely you’re actually kinda surprised he hasn’t died by his own hand, or rich fascist who’s trying to wade into some form of political power (musk being naturalized means he can’t be president thank fuck). Though there’s also the Thiel/Rowling route of rich fascist who is widely disliked but throws money at politicians promising to hurt people he doesn’t like and gets his way more than people would like.

[-] Adkml@hexbear.net 2 points 8 months ago

There is literally nothing he could do or anything that could happen to him that would make me feel bad for him.

Everything that's happening is 10% of what he deserves.

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 2 points 8 months ago

At this point, even if he broke down crying in front of me in a private room, I would assume it was an act to scam me, either out of money, or attention.

[-] umbraroze@kbin.social 16 points 8 months ago

You know, at this point, any sensible company will take a single look at Musk's tantrums and decide that advertising on Twitter is a massive legal liability they cannot afford. Not only is their public image in danger because the content is so badly moderated and offensive content is allowed, but Musk threatens to sue them if they even consider terminating their existing campaigns. Heck, this is to say nothing about the impersonators. The only way for brands to stay safe is to get the hell out and just state that they have no official presence on Twitter. Staying on Twitter is just a disaster waiting to happen.

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago

Cry, bitch!

[-] detalferous@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

You are in luck: Space Karen loves to cry

[-] shiveyarbles@beehaw.org 12 points 8 months ago

I can't imagine being a multi billionaire and being such a miserable attention whore

[-] Jakdracula@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

Perfectly normal behavior.

[-] Rom@hexbear.net 7 points 8 months ago

Critical support for Elon Musk in his one man crusade to destroy Twitter.

[-] Adkml@hexbear.net 3 points 8 months ago

Idk what's funnier him doing everything gnhe can tondestroy it or then people who claim to hate him and Twitter writing essays on why they have tonkeep using it and propping it up.

An unstoppable object versus an immovable force.

[-] ulkesh@beehaw.org 6 points 8 months ago

One day, Elon will no longer exist. That will be a good day for humanity. But sadly he's just a symptom of the billionaires-exist problem. If a matter-energy conversion device ever gets invented and hopefully democratized, money will become meaningless -- and it will drown people like him in their own narcissism.

[-] frogbellyratbone_@hexbear.net 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

video: https://piped.video/watch?v=hlSUy5MS2b0

also, what an absolute sweaty nerd. lol

[-] Adkml@hexbear.net 1 points 8 months ago

That was a deafening silence while he waited for everybody to laugh with him.

Better say it again but louder and while maintaining awkward eye contact

[+] jray4559 -57 points 8 months ago

Elon Musk finally learns the real truth that no one really wants to say: There is no such thing as free speech in the United States.

If saying an opinion gets you fired from your job, or gets advertisers pulled from your site: guess what, that opinion might as well be banned from being posted.

Being held at virtual gunpoint from corporations is no different from being held at actual gunpoint from governments. This is why right-wingers complain about bannings, because, well, they have a point. Even left-wingers get hit with this too, as certain Palestine supporters that aren't careful enough with their wording are finding out.

I'd rather at least have the government say "To promote social cohesion and understanding, saying X opinion about Y groups of people, and stating Z false information will no longer be allowed". Don't get me wrong, that's still invasive as hell and a horrifying precedent to set, but having to walk on eggshells for fear of virtual lynch mobs that can pop up at will and say "He said X he said X fire him and uproot his life or we will drag you through the mud and make you lose precious consumer money!!!!" with little rhyme or reason, never stopping until their existence in society is ruined is not something that a society should support either.

That is simply vigilante justice via keyboard instead of handgun.

[-] Unaware7013@kbin.social 32 points 8 months ago

There is no such thing as free speech in the United States.

If saying an opinion gets you fired from your job, or gets advertisers pulled from your site: guess what, that opinion might as well be banned from being posted.

Free speech is when you can say things without consequences, apparently? So I guess your free speech to say stupid shit is more important than other peoples' free speech to react to what you say or to choose not to associate with you?

I'm surprised at how many knuckledraggers seem to forget that freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences, and freedoms go both ways.

[-] NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social 32 points 8 months ago

You’re fucking around right?

If you say shitty things then expect shitty responses.

Why should we have to have a law about it?

Does this mean I have to shop from someone who says things I disagree with?

It’s the social contract friend, at least we aren’t in England or Russia where people are getting arrested over blank pieces of paper.

Although that might have changed already for all I know.

[-] krellor@kbin.social 22 points 8 months ago

Free speech is about protecting people from a government response to their speech, and even that carves out exceptions for incitement to violence, yelling fire in a crowded theater, etc. I know you mention government bans of certain language, but it misses the mark of what we have defined free speech to be, which is protection from government reprisal.

I have to disagree with the notion that we don't have free speech because people face consequences for what they say. Those consequences may be an inducement to behave in a social cohesive or expected way, but even if you wanted to protect people from that, it would require infringing on others rights. The advertisers have a right not to be associated with Musk. I have a right to dissociate from racists. The only way to protect racists from these consequences would be to infringe on my right not to associate with them.

[-] dirtypirate@kbin.social 18 points 8 months ago

loosing a shitty job vs a mob tearing you from your bed, stripping you naked, beating you, setting you on fire and posing with your mangled carcass....

https://s.hdnux.com/photos/45/75/77/9953221/5/1200x0.jpg

totally the same... reicht?

[-] Decq@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago

Having free speech has nothing to do with having no consequences to what you say. Sure In some instances there might be overreaction and especially companies prefer to be on the safe side of social discourse. The issue there is not free speech but workers rights (in the US at least). But that does not limit your free speech, you're still free to say and publish it. But nobody is required to actually listen to it, or publish it for you. Just because we are free to say what we want, does not make all opinions equal in worth.

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

You have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re too stupid to understand what the guarantee to free speech even means.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The government has not limited speech on Twitter, dumbass.

[-] Oderus@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Someone doesn't know what free speech means lol. Such a smooth-brained comment. I love it.

this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023

109 points (94.3% liked)

Interesting Global News

2356 readers

523 users here now

What is global news?

Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.

Post guidelines

Title format

Post title should mirror the news source title.

URL format

Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.

[Opinion] prefix

Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.

Rules

1. English only

Title and associated content has to be in English.

2. No social media posts

Avoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.

3. Respectful communication

All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.

4. Inclusivity

Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.

5. Ad hominem attacks

Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.

6. Off-topic tangents

Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.

7. Instance rules may apply

If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.

Companion communities

!legalnews@lemmy.zip - International and local legal news.
!technology@lemmy.zip - Technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip - Interesting articles, projects, and research that doesn't fit the definition of news.

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

BrikoX@lemmy.zip