3 ms·
> there's no reason why Southwest's advertisements should be shown in a negative light.. So basically there's been a team suppressing any really bad news about
by ctoth 4y ago
> there's no reason why Southwest's advertisements should be shown in a negative light..
So basically there's been a team suppressing any really bad news about any company who advertises on Twitter? Am I reading that right? And you want them back?
- RheingoldRiver 4y agoI don't think it's that necessarily; instead, you could pause Southwest advertisements until the next news cycle for example, or look for keywords in tweets and avoid showing SW ads near such tweets (e.g. normally you want a SW ad near tweets with "airport" but for the next 5 days you want the opposite approach)
- lukevp 4y agoNo, I don’t think you read that correctly. The thing that’s removed is the advertisement, not the news. Eg if I tweeted “HackerNews sucks”, they would not want to pay to advertise on or near my tweet. They would rather advertise in a more neutral or positive space. Someone else could fill that advertising slot (eg. McDonald’s).
- blueelephanttea 4y agoI mean you are very clearly not reading it right since the commenter's comment had nothing to do with suppressing news and only had to do with where paid advertisements are placed.
- kradroy 4y agoYou have it the wrong way around. The advertiser will ask for the ads to be suppressed or removed from negative contexts, because that's part of the service they pay for.
- aetherson 4y agoThat's not what your parent said: they said when there's any really bad news about a company who advertises on Twitter, that company doesn't want its ads shown right next to that news.