9 ms·

More advertisers halt spending on X in growing backlash against Musk

85 points by MilnerRoute 3y ago

dorkwood 3y ago
As Sun Tzu said, when you are strong, appear weak.
- kuhewa 3y ago
  Besides the strong (when they are expertly deploying an elaborate ruse), you know who else often appears weak? The weak.
  - aeonik 3y ago
    So if someone appears "strong", does that mean they are also "weak"? "Strong" → "Appears Weak" "Weak" → "Appears Weak" ⊕ "Feigns strength" Everyone is "weak" ∨ "appears weak"? Is "appearance of strength" ∧ "strong" valid in this meta? I need someone's help with the logic. I'm a bit rusty. I think it's just an implication, so it is valid to "appear strong" ∧ "be strong" I'm also curious about the distribution here. I'm also just now noticing how weird the word strong is. It's possible that this is the reason: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_satiation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_satiation
    - kuhewa 3y ago
      Yeah unfortunately the conjunctions just aren't commutative in the game of strongy-weaky.
- Pxtl 3y ago
  Napoleon said "never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake".
greyface- 3y ago
Syndicated from NYT, original URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/18/technology/elon-musk-twitter-x-advertisers.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/18/technology/elon-musk-twit...
- dang 3y ago
  Thanks, let's use that above since it's the canonical source. Submitted link was https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2023/nov/18/more-advertisers-halt-spending-on-x-in-growing-bac/ https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2023/nov/18/more-advertise..., which appears to be unpaywalled.
jmspring 3y ago
[flagged]
roenxi 3y ago
There is a lot here to be think about. Three most interesting points to me are 1. These companies have bottom-of-the-barrel moral standards and don't care what one person on Twitter is Tweeting. This has to be political manoeuvring of some sort. 2. A lot of advertisers were quitting Twitter a while ago weren't they? But it has been months now. If they're still quitting, that suggests the flood of quitters is more of a small trickle. So this the first time all these companies have quit? Or is it that the media companies are quitting this round? 3. Musk is still the wealthiest human on the planet (in history? I expect in nominal terms he's the wealthiest in history). Twitter is a bit of a political sideshow for him. He might even decide to run it without ads, that'd hurt him financially and be a win for the rest of us.
- pxmpxm 3y ago
  Not sure why the downvotes - this definitely seems to be a coordinated effort, rather than one off brand-management exercise by IBM, but to what end I have no idea. Evidently Media Matters is somehow inciting this?
- viraptor 3y ago
  Lots of companies quit then returned. I don't know if these ones are in the first batch of quitting, but it may be the second time for them rather than "a trickle".
- throw0101b 3y ago
  > 3. Musk is still the wealthiest human on the planet (in history? I expect in nominal terms he's the wealthiest in history). John D. Rockefeller would like to have a word if we're talking about Americans, as would Carnegie and Vanderbilt: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_richest_Americans_in_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_richest_Americans_in_h... Internationally: Augustus Caesar, Emperor Shenzong, Akbar I: * https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3197600/10-richest-people-who-ever-lived-net-worths-ranked-elon-musk-and-jeff-bezos-dont-come-close-genghis https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/31976...
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
pdar4123 3y ago
[flagged]
hsnewman 3y ago
[flagged]
- FreezerburnV 3y ago
  [flagged]
tazu 3y ago
[flagged]
alex_lav 3y ago
[flagged]
jtdev 3y ago
[dead]
totallywrong 3y ago
This guy would be considered a genius, admired and respected worldwide, a living legend.. if he'd never opened that Twitter account. But he did, so he's just another eccentric rich idiot.
- flashback2199 3y ago
  Strange that you don't think his twitter account helped him get all that media attention along the way.
  - totallywrong 3y ago
    The attention he got because of Twitter has always been overwhelmingly negative, by his own doing. Do you think the guy who founded Tesla and SpaceX needed any more media attention?
    - orwin 3y ago
      He did not found Tesla, did he?
      - throw0101b 3y ago
        > He did not found Tesla, did he? There was a legal agreement that allows him to call himself that: > The company was incorporated as Tesla Motors, Inc. on July 1, 2003, by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning.[12][13] Eberhard and Tarpenning served as CEO and CFO, respectively.[14] Eberhard said that he wanted to build "a car manufacturer that is also a technology company", with its core technologies as "the battery, the computer software, and the proprietary motor".[15] > Ian Wright was Tesla's third employee, joining a few months later.[12] In February 2004, the company raised US$7.5 million (equivalent to $12 million in 2022) in series A funding, including $6.5 million (equivalent to $10 million in 2022) from Elon Musk, who had received $100 million from the sale of his interest in PayPal two years earlier. Musk became the chairman of the board of directors and the largest shareholder of Tesla.[16][17][14] J. B. Straubel joined Tesla in May 2004 as chief technical officer.[18] > A lawsuit settlement agreed to by Eberhard and Tesla in September 2009 allows all five – Eberhard, Tarpenning, Wright, Musk, and Straubel – to call themselves co-founders.[19] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla,_Inc.#Founding_(2003–2004) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla,_Inc.#Founding_(2003–200...
freewinz 3y ago
[flagged]
freewinz 3y ago
[flagged]
ekianjo 3y ago
Lools like the monetization to move away from relying on ads was the right one all along
- clipsy 3y ago
  That would require it actually being sufficient to pay the bills, which at present it is very far from.
  - ekianjo 3y ago
    You have to start somewhere. Since Twitter was so deep in the red for so long anyway they have a mountain to climb
    - johneth 3y ago
      The reason Twitter's so deep in the red right now is because of the leveraged buyout by Musk. Pre-acquisition Twitter was, at worst, treading water. Musk's mismanagement is what's causing Twitter's current poor financial state.
    - 3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago
      Twitter wasn't in the red. It was roughly break even, with way over half of quarters in past 5 years profitable pre-Musk. You bought a history rewrite peddled by Musk himself. Twitter was never a failing company. It was just a mediocre company. But now... now it's a rapidly failing company, propped up by Musk selling a few billion in TSLA shares late last year.
- 3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago
  The monetization currently is bringing revenue less than one percent of their ad revenue. With no signs of improvement. That’s like having to go to work 100 miles away, intentionally crashing your car and going like “well, looks like putting on my running shoes this morning turned out right all along!”
  - 3y ago
matisseverduyn 3y ago
The reason for the lawsuit [1] seems to contradict itself; it's against spreading misinformation on X, while invoking the principle of allowing misinformation on X? > "But for speech to be truly free, we must also have the freedom to see or hear things that some people may consider objectionable. We believe that everyone has the right to make up their own minds about what to read..." So... "Let [Media Matters] say what you [consider objectionable], and [let us make up our own minds about what to read]." I do get that that shouldn't preclude lawsuits for slander/libel... but suing people out of existence with "thermonuclear" lawsuits seems to be roughly the same type of tyranny as the censoring he's taking a stand against. [1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1725771191644758037 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1725771191644758037
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago
  Ultimately this sort of thing gets justified as "I'm picking on people my own size", or "I'm defending the regular person against these other powerful entities". Even billionaires like to think of themselves as Robin Hoods.
  - matisseverduyn 3y ago
    Definitely agree with that. And it's media vs. media, so they both have to sell a narrative since the stronger story, not who's actually right, will win.
Pxtl 3y ago
Musk is now the poster child for ruining your own success via social media. He had the world in his hand and now he's an internet-poisoned laughing-stock chasing away all the advertisers.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
JaDogg 3y ago
Haha, the US is leaning towards the right wing, and Elon probably has an advantage in doing what he did. Similarly, he mentioned that AI needs to stop, but then proceeded with AI projects. He says what grabs attention to divert from what he truly wants to do.

85 points by MilnerRoute 3y ago

dorkwood 3y ago

As Sun Tzu said, when you are strong, appear weak.

kuhewa 3y ago
Besides the strong (when they are expertly deploying an elaborate ruse), you know who else often appears weak? The weak.
- aeonik 3y ago
  So if someone appears "strong", does that mean they are also "weak"? "Strong" → "Appears Weak" "Weak" → "Appears Weak" ⊕ "Feigns strength" Everyone is "weak" ∨ "appears weak"? Is "appearance of strength" ∧ "strong" valid in this meta? I need someone's help with the logic. I'm a bit rusty. I think it's just an implication, so it is valid to "appear strong" ∧ "be strong" I'm also curious about the distribution here. I'm also just now noticing how weird the word strong is. It's possible that this is the reason: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_satiation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_satiation
  - kuhewa 3y ago
    Yeah unfortunately the conjunctions just aren't commutative in the game of strongy-weaky.
Pxtl 3y ago
Napoleon said "never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake".

greyface- 3y ago

Syndicated from NYT, original URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/18/technology/elon-musk-twitter-x-advertisers.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/18/technology/elon-musk-twit...

dang 3y ago
Thanks, let's use that above since it's the canonical source. Submitted link was https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2023/nov/18/more-advertisers-halt-spending-on-x-in-growing-bac/ https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2023/nov/18/more-advertise..., which appears to be unpaywalled.

jmspring 3y ago

[flagged]

roenxi 3y ago

There is a lot here to be think about. Three most interesting points to me are 1. These companies have bottom-of-the-barrel moral standards and don't care what one person on Twitter is Tweeting. This has to be political manoeuvring of some sort. 2. A lot of advertisers were quitting Twitter a while ago weren't they? But it has been months now. If they're still quitting, that suggests the flood of quitters is more of a small trickle. So this the first time all these companies have quit? Or is it that the media companies are quitting this round? 3. Musk is still the wealthiest human on the planet (in history? I expect in nominal terms he's the wealthiest in history). Twitter is a bit of a political sideshow for him. He might even decide to run it without ads, that'd hurt him financially and be a win for the rest of us.

pxmpxm 3y ago
Not sure why the downvotes - this definitely seems to be a coordinated effort, rather than one off brand-management exercise by IBM, but to what end I have no idea. Evidently Media Matters is somehow inciting this?
viraptor 3y ago
Lots of companies quit then returned. I don't know if these ones are in the first batch of quitting, but it may be the second time for them rather than "a trickle".
throw0101b 3y ago
> 3. Musk is still the wealthiest human on the planet (in history? I expect in nominal terms he's the wealthiest in history). John D. Rockefeller would like to have a word if we're talking about Americans, as would Carnegie and Vanderbilt: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_richest_Americans_in_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_richest_Americans_in_h... Internationally: Augustus Caesar, Emperor Shenzong, Akbar I: * https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3197600/10-richest-people-who-ever-lived-net-worths-ranked-elon-musk-and-jeff-bezos-dont-come-close-genghis https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/31976...
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago

pdar4123 3y ago

[flagged]

hsnewman 3y ago

[flagged]

FreezerburnV 3y ago
[flagged]

tazu 3y ago

[flagged]

alex_lav 3y ago

[flagged]

jtdev 3y ago

[dead]

totallywrong 3y ago

This guy would be considered a genius, admired and respected worldwide, a living legend.. if he'd never opened that Twitter account. But he did, so he's just another eccentric rich idiot.

flashback2199 3y ago
Strange that you don't think his twitter account helped him get all that media attention along the way.
- totallywrong 3y ago
  The attention he got because of Twitter has always been overwhelmingly negative, by his own doing. Do you think the guy who founded Tesla and SpaceX needed any more media attention?
  - orwin 3y ago
    He did not found Tesla, did he?
    - throw0101b 3y ago
      > He did not found Tesla, did he? There was a legal agreement that allows him to call himself that: > The company was incorporated as Tesla Motors, Inc. on July 1, 2003, by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning.[12][13] Eberhard and Tarpenning served as CEO and CFO, respectively.[14] Eberhard said that he wanted to build "a car manufacturer that is also a technology company", with its core technologies as "the battery, the computer software, and the proprietary motor".[15] > Ian Wright was Tesla's third employee, joining a few months later.[12] In February 2004, the company raised US$7.5 million (equivalent to $12 million in 2022) in series A funding, including $6.5 million (equivalent to $10 million in 2022) from Elon Musk, who had received $100 million from the sale of his interest in PayPal two years earlier. Musk became the chairman of the board of directors and the largest shareholder of Tesla.[16][17][14] J. B. Straubel joined Tesla in May 2004 as chief technical officer.[18] > A lawsuit settlement agreed to by Eberhard and Tesla in September 2009 allows all five – Eberhard, Tarpenning, Wright, Musk, and Straubel – to call themselves co-founders.[19] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla,_Inc.#Founding_(2003–2004) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla,_Inc.#Founding_(2003–200...

freewinz 3y ago

[flagged]

freewinz 3y ago

[flagged]

ekianjo 3y ago

Lools like the monetization to move away from relying on ads was the right one all along

clipsy 3y ago
That would require it actually being sufficient to pay the bills, which at present it is very far from.
- ekianjo 3y ago
  You have to start somewhere. Since Twitter was so deep in the red for so long anyway they have a mountain to climb
  - johneth 3y ago
    The reason Twitter's so deep in the red right now is because of the leveraged buyout by Musk. Pre-acquisition Twitter was, at worst, treading water. Musk's mismanagement is what's causing Twitter's current poor financial state.
  - 3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago
    Twitter wasn't in the red. It was roughly break even, with way over half of quarters in past 5 years profitable pre-Musk. You bought a history rewrite peddled by Musk himself. Twitter was never a failing company. It was just a mediocre company. But now... now it's a rapidly failing company, propped up by Musk selling a few billion in TSLA shares late last year.
3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago
The monetization currently is bringing revenue less than one percent of their ad revenue. With no signs of improvement. That’s like having to go to work 100 miles away, intentionally crashing your car and going like “well, looks like putting on my running shoes this morning turned out right all along!”
- 3y ago

matisseverduyn 3y ago

The reason for the lawsuit [1] seems to contradict itself; it's against spreading misinformation on X, while invoking the principle of allowing misinformation on X? > "But for speech to be truly free, we must also have the freedom to see or hear things that some people may consider objectionable. We believe that everyone has the right to make up their own minds about what to read..." So... "Let [Media Matters] say what you [consider objectionable], and [let us make up our own minds about what to read]." I do get that that shouldn't preclude lawsuits for slander/libel... but suing people out of existence with "thermonuclear" lawsuits seems to be roughly the same type of tyranny as the censoring he's taking a stand against. [1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1725771191644758037 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1725771191644758037

anonymouskimmer 3y ago
Ultimately this sort of thing gets justified as "I'm picking on people my own size", or "I'm defending the regular person against these other powerful entities". Even billionaires like to think of themselves as Robin Hoods.
- matisseverduyn 3y ago
  Definitely agree with that. And it's media vs. media, so they both have to sell a narrative since the stronger story, not who's actually right, will win.

Pxtl 3y ago

Musk is now the poster child for ruining your own success via social media. He had the world in his hand and now he's an internet-poisoned laughing-stock chasing away all the advertisers.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

JaDogg 3y ago

Haha, the US is leaning towards the right wing, and Elon probably has an advantage in doing what he did. Similarly, he mentioned that AI needs to stop, but then proceeded with AI projects. He says what grabs attention to divert from what he truly wants to do.