Right. Media matters didn't get the result it wanted so it intentionally manipulated it's account settings so it could. It took them several tries to do this. They were not honest about their process.
Unless Musk can show that Media Matters was lying about what Musk was doing, he has no case.
Seems pretty easy.
And since there is evidence that Musk has placed ads next to pro-Nazi posts,
You're doing the same thing MM is doing. You're citing a single instance without any context or without any broader research to quantify how often this happens because you want to imply it's being done intentionally.. which you have zero evidence for.
Well, since I don't have access to what Media Matters has discovered, and I don't really care enough about it to do any more research, how about a bet?
If Musk actually follows through with this, and he wins this case, I'll give you a very sincere apology and admit you were right.
If he loses the case, or drops it, you give me a very sincere apology and admit I was right.
and I don't really care enough about it to do any more research
I love when people try to present rank laziness as some sort of special attribute that puts them above 5 whole seconds of effort.
How about that?
How about we just agree to disagree and leave it at that? I'm not trying to convince you of anything, and your apologies and admissions would be completely worthless, as you're unwilling to even research the thing you're pontificating on.
Does it bother some companies that their ads are run next to pro-Nazi content? Yes
Everything else is bullshit. If it bothers a company that their ad is run next to pro-Nazi posts, then they should be able to pull their ads without being threatened of a lawsuit.
This is just some really hypocritical shit, considering how gleeful people were about Bud Light getting canceled over the tranny thing.
Conservative media watchdog groups went around to companies that ran Bud Light ads and then those companies pulled the ads.
This is just some really hypocritical shit, considering how gleeful people were about Bud Light getting canceled over the tranny thing.
No.. it isn't. X didn't specifically go out and ask "Nazis" to make content on it's platform. They didn't specifically choose to put advertisements next to this content exclusively. They didn't release an advertisement using Hitler as the new spokesperson for X. You're as disingenuous as Media Matters is. Do you work for them or something? You're working really hard to push this insane point of view.
How often does a company's ad need to be placed next to a pro-nazi post for it to count, in your opinion?
If that company didn't want it to happen even once, can't that be their right?
Let's spin this around. Let's say that some really conservative company had their ad placed next to, let's say, a pro-trans or pro-pedophilia post. And they pulled their ad because of that. Would you argue that it didn't happen enough to matter, or it was taken out of context?
Let's say that some really conservative company had their ad placed next to, let's say, a pro-trans or pro-pedophilia post.
Who would care? The harm is that the ad is probably misplaced and we spent money to show an ad to someone who is probably not going to engage with it.
And they pulled their ad because of that.
That's not similar to this situation. You're forgetting the third party interference.
Would you argue that it didn't happen enough to matter, or it was taken out of context?
I'd argue that it doesn't matter. The brand isn't harmed by being selected to show in an ad slot next to content the user specifically searched for. You obviously don't understand how programmatic ads work, which is what Media Matters is relying on.
The ad gets selected because of your profile. Male, 25-34, lives in midwest. You match the criteria for NFL ads. When you do things on X, ad slots appear, and they get filled. If you search for "JewsDid911" then you get the content you want, plus some ad slots, which in this case got filled by the NFL because it matched the user criteria.
The NFL got what they wanted, targeting users. The user got what it wanted, the content they searched for. Media Matters disingenuously screenshots this scenario and then lies to you about what is actually happening implying that is an intentional outcome on by X.
More than likely.. the NFL, as an advertiser, has access to content restriction controls on their side. The only case you could make here is that X is intentionally ignoring those content controls in order to boost the number of ads served and revenue generated. That's a huge claim and not at all borne out by Media Maters "work".
Right. Media matters didn't get the result it wanted so it intentionally manipulated it's account settings so it could. It took them several tries to do this. They were not honest about their process.
Seems pretty easy.
You're doing the same thing MM is doing. You're citing a single instance without any context or without any broader research to quantify how often this happens because you want to imply it's being done intentionally.. which you have zero evidence for.
Well, since I don't have access to what Media Matters has discovered, and I don't really care enough about it to do any more research, how about a bet?
If Musk actually follows through with this, and he wins this case, I'll give you a very sincere apology and admit you were right.
If he loses the case, or drops it, you give me a very sincere apology and admit I was right.
How about that?
https://www.mediamatters.org/twitter/x-placing-ads-amazon-nba-mexico-nbcuniversal-and-others-next-content-white-nationalist
I love when people try to present rank laziness as some sort of special attribute that puts them above 5 whole seconds of effort.
How about we just agree to disagree and leave it at that? I'm not trying to convince you of anything, and your apologies and admissions would be completely worthless, as you're unwilling to even research the thing you're pontificating on.
Dude, it's really simple.
Does X have pro-Nazi content? Yes
Do ads run next to his content? Yes
Does it bother some companies that their ads are run next to pro-Nazi content? Yes
Everything else is bullshit. If it bothers a company that their ad is run next to pro-Nazi posts, then they should be able to pull their ads without being threatened of a lawsuit.
This is just some really hypocritical shit, considering how gleeful people were about Bud Light getting canceled over the tranny thing.
Conservative media watchdog groups went around to companies that ran Bud Light ads and then those companies pulled the ads.
Why was that ok, but this isn't?
No.. it isn't. X didn't specifically go out and ask "Nazis" to make content on it's platform. They didn't specifically choose to put advertisements next to this content exclusively. They didn't release an advertisement using Hitler as the new spokesperson for X. You're as disingenuous as Media Matters is. Do you work for them or something? You're working really hard to push this insane point of view.
How often does a company's ad need to be placed next to a pro-nazi post for it to count, in your opinion?
If that company didn't want it to happen even once, can't that be their right?
Let's spin this around. Let's say that some really conservative company had their ad placed next to, let's say, a pro-trans or pro-pedophilia post. And they pulled their ad because of that. Would you argue that it didn't happen enough to matter, or it was taken out of context?
Who would care? The harm is that the ad is probably misplaced and we spent money to show an ad to someone who is probably not going to engage with it.
That's not similar to this situation. You're forgetting the third party interference.
I'd argue that it doesn't matter. The brand isn't harmed by being selected to show in an ad slot next to content the user specifically searched for. You obviously don't understand how programmatic ads work, which is what Media Matters is relying on.
The ad gets selected because of your profile. Male, 25-34, lives in midwest. You match the criteria for NFL ads. When you do things on X, ad slots appear, and they get filled. If you search for "JewsDid911" then you get the content you want, plus some ad slots, which in this case got filled by the NFL because it matched the user criteria.
The NFL got what they wanted, targeting users. The user got what it wanted, the content they searched for. Media Matters disingenuously screenshots this scenario and then lies to you about what is actually happening implying that is an intentional outcome on by X.
More than likely.. the NFL, as an advertiser, has access to content restriction controls on their side. The only case you could make here is that X is intentionally ignoring those content controls in order to boost the number of ads served and revenue generated. That's a huge claim and not at all borne out by Media Maters "work".