Are they legally obligated to advertise on X? I don't understand this. If someone doesn't want to put ads on X any longer, for whatever reason, isn't that their business? How can someone force a company to place ads on their site?
A large group of several leftist advertisers pulled out of X at the same time. It's obvious because they don't agree with Elon's politics. In a way it's an attack against his company, and he's filing suit because of it.
Isn't it their right to stop running ads on a platform they disagree with? How are they legally obligated to continue placing ads on X?
This is a common scenario.
Back in 2021, over 1,000 companies pulled their ads from Facebook because they thought Facebook didn't do enough to stop hate speech after the George Floyd thing.
There was a big kerfuffle over what some of those nags on "The View" said, and the tv station lost 5 big ad accounts because of it.
I just don't see how you can legally force a company to advertise with X if they don't want to.
And what can of worms is this going to open up in the future? Because you know if Musk wins this, libs will use it as well. They'll start forcing conservative companies to advertise on pornohub or something.
I'm sure there is much more to it, this is just at first glance. I haven't done any deep diving on the research of it yet. He has a lot mentioned that he's filing a lawsuit for, including their "dark money"
A liberal media watchdog group found a bunch of ads (from companies like IBM and Lionsgate and some other big companies) that X was putting next to pro-Nazi, pro-Hitler posts. And since it's a media watchdog group, they informed these companies that their ads were being put next to pro-Nazi posts. And the companies, not wanting to be associated with pro-Nazism, pulled their ads.
So obviously, Musk is angry about that, because he's losing ad revenue, so he wants to sue Media Matters for doing their job. Basically, he said they were "aggressively searching" for content they don't like (well no shit, Sherlock, that's their job) and were somehow misrepresenting how often ads were coming up next to pro-Nazi posts, or something equally stupid.
Because a) it's not illegal for media watchdog groups to "aggressively" search for content, or to share their finding with the companies involved (that's their job) and b) the idea that it's ok for a company to have their ads placed next to content that goes against their values is ok, because it doesn't happen over x amount of times, is just stupid. If a company doesn't want to be associated with pro-Nazi groups, then that's their right. Saying, "Oh, but that only happens x amount of times" is idiotic if one time is too many for the company's values.
Musk himself said that some ads were placed by pro-Nazi posts. There's evidence of it happening. He doesn't have a case. He's just trying to bully advertisers into staying with him and trying to scare a liberal media watchdog group.
Now, for those that agree with him, I'd like to remind them of that whole thing with Bud Light and the tranny. When What's his face started doing ads for Bud Light, conservative watchdog groups went to all the companies running ads (aggressively searching for content) and said, "Hey, this doesn't match your company's values" (or whatever) and those companies dropped their ads for Bud Light. So, just imagine Bud Light saying they're going to sue the conservative media watchdog groups for doing their job and getting those companies to pull the Bud Light ads, along with the companies who pulled their ads because of something stupid, like they only showed the Bud Light tranny ads on Hallmark(or insert conservative company here) x amount of times. Think they would win that lawsuit? Would you support Bud Light in their lawsuit?
Why do you assume that just because I don't side with Musk on this, I must be shilling for Media Matters, David Brock, or anyone else?
Why are you so fervrent in your defense of Musk? Are you shilling for him?
Is it really such an outrageous idea that someone just thinks Musk is wrong in this matter?
Is it not acceptable for someone to have a different opinion? Is this supposed to be a hive mind? We're all supposed to think the same about everything?
2/4 - 'Media Matters' is a Soros-formed and funded Far Left, Pro-Jewish fake watchdog organization that is not happy that Elon is offering free speech for everyone. They don't like that Elon is allowing people to speak freely about the Israel-Hamas-Palestine conflict. They feel threatened. They want the speech to be only Pro-Israel and Pro-Jew. Anything else is a no-go.
1/4 - No. He is misrepresenting. Read the statement Elon made yourself. Don't fall for his spin. When you let others tell you what it means, you assume they are telling you the unbiased truth. In this case, the person you asked may be batting for the other team and may appear to present 'the facts' but omits important facts that count.
3/4 - So, they colluded to make contrived and falsified claims to influence the big name advertisers of Twitter/X to join Media Matters and ruin Twitter/X financially by cancelling all their advertising.
Elon saw through their manufactured scenario and isn't going to take it sitting down.
4/4 - A similar example is this fake scenario: You know the saying that you have more chance of being struck by lightning than you do of winning the lottery?
Well, you use that knowledge to spread the rumor that if you buy a lottery ticket from the only vendor in town that sells them, (A small business that is a competitor to you) that you will likely be struck by lightning.
Then you tell naïve town folk that a lightning strike happened near that convenience mart, and everyone in town is afraid to buy their lottery ticket from that vendor, for fear of getting struck. They just stop buying from that vendor all together.
That vendor now suffers a financial loss because selling lottery tickets was his bread and butter, and your competing convenience mart (that doesn't sell lottery tickets) gets more customers into your business instead.
Of course the lightning story was manufactured in order to harm the other guy and benefit yourself. It was disingenuous and insidious. It is analogous to what Media Matters does to those organizations that won't follow their orders.
No problem. There's a whole lot of stupid crap in what Musk put out in his complaint, but those are the main issues.
I think the one Musk is relying on to support him is when he says that Media Matters used some algorithm or something to make it look like those ads placed on pro-Nazi posts would come up in someone's feed more often than they really would. I don't really understand it.
But if you're a company that doesn't want to be associated with pro-Nazism, having just one ad show up next to pro-Nazi content is one too many.
Now, if Media Matters did something legitimately fraudulent or illegal, sure, go after them hard. But that doesn't seem to be the case.
It's not illegal for media watchdog groups to gather information or for them to inform companies of what they find and it's not illegal for companies to pull ads from something they don't want to be associated with their product. And that's what Musk is complaining about the loudest.
Lefty orgs trying to financially harm X and Elon just because they disagree with his politics.
Also since the company is private, it’s now a personal attack on him.
But how can they harm Elon? He runs X so what did they do? Did they post bad things on Media Matters website or something like that?
X makes money by selling ads, and several major companies have stopped advertising on X. This hits X’s revenues.
Are they legally obligated to advertise on X? I don't understand this. If someone doesn't want to put ads on X any longer, for whatever reason, isn't that their business? How can someone force a company to place ads on their site?
Look up "tortious interference"
Are you daft or just dull? Media matters is essentially shaming other companies into pulling advertisement in order to hurt X.
A large group of several leftist advertisers pulled out of X at the same time. It's obvious because they don't agree with Elon's politics. In a way it's an attack against his company, and he's filing suit because of it.
Isn't it their right to stop running ads on a platform they disagree with? How are they legally obligated to continue placing ads on X?
This is a common scenario. Back in 2021, over 1,000 companies pulled their ads from Facebook because they thought Facebook didn't do enough to stop hate speech after the George Floyd thing.
There was a big kerfuffle over what some of those nags on "The View" said, and the tv station lost 5 big ad accounts because of it.
I just don't see how you can legally force a company to advertise with X if they don't want to.
And what can of worms is this going to open up in the future? Because you know if Musk wins this, libs will use it as well. They'll start forcing conservative companies to advertise on pornohub or something.
This is just stupid.
I'm sure there is much more to it, this is just at first glance. I haven't done any deep diving on the research of it yet. He has a lot mentioned that he's filing a lawsuit for, including their "dark money"
A liberal media watchdog group found a bunch of ads (from companies like IBM and Lionsgate and some other big companies) that X was putting next to pro-Nazi, pro-Hitler posts. And since it's a media watchdog group, they informed these companies that their ads were being put next to pro-Nazi posts. And the companies, not wanting to be associated with pro-Nazism, pulled their ads.
So obviously, Musk is angry about that, because he's losing ad revenue, so he wants to sue Media Matters for doing their job. Basically, he said they were "aggressively searching" for content they don't like (well no shit, Sherlock, that's their job) and were somehow misrepresenting how often ads were coming up next to pro-Nazi posts, or something equally stupid.
Because a) it's not illegal for media watchdog groups to "aggressively" search for content, or to share their finding with the companies involved (that's their job) and b) the idea that it's ok for a company to have their ads placed next to content that goes against their values is ok, because it doesn't happen over x amount of times, is just stupid. If a company doesn't want to be associated with pro-Nazi groups, then that's their right. Saying, "Oh, but that only happens x amount of times" is idiotic if one time is too many for the company's values.
Musk himself said that some ads were placed by pro-Nazi posts. There's evidence of it happening. He doesn't have a case. He's just trying to bully advertisers into staying with him and trying to scare a liberal media watchdog group.
Now, for those that agree with him, I'd like to remind them of that whole thing with Bud Light and the tranny. When What's his face started doing ads for Bud Light, conservative watchdog groups went to all the companies running ads (aggressively searching for content) and said, "Hey, this doesn't match your company's values" (or whatever) and those companies dropped their ads for Bud Light. So, just imagine Bud Light saying they're going to sue the conservative media watchdog groups for doing their job and getting those companies to pull the Bud Light ads, along with the companies who pulled their ads because of something stupid, like they only showed the Bud Light tranny ads on Hallmark(or insert conservative company here) x amount of times. Think they would win that lawsuit? Would you support Bud Light in their lawsuit?
Who founded Media Matters?
David Brock.
Brock was formerly in a long term relationship with James Alefantis.
Why you shilling for Brock?
Why do you assume that just because I don't side with Musk on this, I must be shilling for Media Matters, David Brock, or anyone else?
Why are you so fervrent in your defense of Musk? Are you shilling for him?
Is it really such an outrageous idea that someone just thinks Musk is wrong in this matter?
Is it not acceptable for someone to have a different opinion? Is this supposed to be a hive mind? We're all supposed to think the same about everything?
You make good points. Thanks for the education. I appreciate the time you took to write this up.
2/4 - 'Media Matters' is a Soros-formed and funded Far Left, Pro-Jewish fake watchdog organization that is not happy that Elon is offering free speech for everyone. They don't like that Elon is allowing people to speak freely about the Israel-Hamas-Palestine conflict. They feel threatened. They want the speech to be only Pro-Israel and Pro-Jew. Anything else is a no-go.
1/4 - No. He is misrepresenting. Read the statement Elon made yourself. Don't fall for his spin. When you let others tell you what it means, you assume they are telling you the unbiased truth. In this case, the person you asked may be batting for the other team and may appear to present 'the facts' but omits important facts that count.
3/4 - So, they colluded to make contrived and falsified claims to influence the big name advertisers of Twitter/X to join Media Matters and ruin Twitter/X financially by cancelling all their advertising.
Elon saw through their manufactured scenario and isn't going to take it sitting down.
4/4 - A similar example is this fake scenario: You know the saying that you have more chance of being struck by lightning than you do of winning the lottery?
Well, you use that knowledge to spread the rumor that if you buy a lottery ticket from the only vendor in town that sells them, (A small business that is a competitor to you) that you will likely be struck by lightning.
Then you tell naïve town folk that a lightning strike happened near that convenience mart, and everyone in town is afraid to buy their lottery ticket from that vendor, for fear of getting struck. They just stop buying from that vendor all together.
That vendor now suffers a financial loss because selling lottery tickets was his bread and butter, and your competing convenience mart (that doesn't sell lottery tickets) gets more customers into your business instead.
Of course the lightning story was manufactured in order to harm the other guy and benefit yourself. It was disingenuous and insidious. It is analogous to what Media Matters does to those organizations that won't follow their orders.
No problem. There's a whole lot of stupid crap in what Musk put out in his complaint, but those are the main issues.
I think the one Musk is relying on to support him is when he says that Media Matters used some algorithm or something to make it look like those ads placed on pro-Nazi posts would come up in someone's feed more often than they really would. I don't really understand it.
But if you're a company that doesn't want to be associated with pro-Nazism, having just one ad show up next to pro-Nazi content is one too many.
Now, if Media Matters did something legitimately fraudulent or illegal, sure, go after them hard. But that doesn't seem to be the case.
It's not illegal for media watchdog groups to gather information or for them to inform companies of what they find and it's not illegal for companies to pull ads from something they don't want to be associated with their product. And that's what Musk is complaining about the loudest.