4 ms·
that they are lying hypocrites seems to be the general drift :) complaining that RT was influencing the election after attempting to sell them a platform to in
by saas_co_de 9y ago
that they are lying hypocrites seems to be the general drift :)
complaining that RT was influencing the election after attempting to sell them a platform to influence the election does seem to fit the bill.
- matt4077 9y agoBut that's the point: There's nothing in this presentation suggesting they were even implying that it's a way to change the outcome of the election. In fact, I'd be quite surprised if it were: If you're doing marketing at Twitter in summer 2016, you'd be a genius if you though of RT's motives as anything else than getting clicks for their content.
- blfr 9y agoThere is nothing anywhere suggesting that RT did or could change the outcome of the elections because it has always been far beyond their reach. Clinton's campaign outspent Trump's so badly that a few million this or that way did not matter. It may have been illegal or unethical for US outlets to take the money but it did not make a lick of difference in the outcome.
- itronitron 9y agoThe whole point of buying advertising is to influence an outcome and the US Presidential Election is the clear topic or 'case study' for the slide deck. Twitter is listing discounts for advertising to a foreign news agency while bragging about how its platform allows advertisers to engage with their audience. It wouldn't surprise me if nobody at Twitter considered RT's motives, but then... ignorance is not an excuse.
- fwdpropaganda 9y agoVery well put.
- matt4077 9y ago> The whole point of buying advertising is to influence an outcome That's sort of a truism, right? > It wouldn't surprise me if nobody at Twitter considered RT's motives Oh, sorry. I thought you were disagreeing.