3 ms·

I struggle with the two-sided ness of his claims. If he wanted to build a free speech base, and burn his money doing so, that is his right, but then he can't wh

I struggle with the two-sided ness of his claims. If he wanted to build a free speech base, and burn his money doing so, that is his right, but then he can't whine and complain if his customers (advertisers) decide to take their business elsewhere. Which he does, in spades. Even more oddly, he has poor Linda Yaccarino out there pressing the flesh on Madison Avenue, trying to reassure customers that Twitter is a safe space for them to promote their brand. The same logic applies in the other direction too, eg if I sell beer and my customers object to my spokesperson, I can be sorry about their decision, and regret their choice not to buy my beer, but I dont have the right to complain. In both cases, a business decision was made, and the business owner must deal with the consequences.

throw310822 3y ago
> then he can't whine and complain if his customers (advertisers) decide to take their business elsewhere I said this so many times it's embarrassing, but the wrong assumption is that advertisers stop buying ads because somehow the content directly damages the brand. Which I think is super naive. The reality is that organisations and media who dislike the content threaten advertisers of organising campaigns against them if they don't boycott the platform. Consumer actions (right or wrong, doesn't matter) are almost never spontaneous, they need to be organised and promoted. There are organisations that have this as one of their core businesses and have an enormous ability to influence what is published. So Musk is not complaining about the fact that his advertisers are going elsewhere, but about the fact that political organisations are pressuring them to do so under threat of damaging their business.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  Given how distasteful people find his actions, it's not surprising that people organize against them. Unless you're suggesting that his actions are viewed favorably by people (lol), but people are being brainwashed into acting in the opposite manner by some conspiracy of organizations. The more likely scenario is that most people think he acts like a douchebag, and most folks don't like associating with people who act like douchebags, and if those folks organize, more power to 'em.
- ryanklee 3y ago
  They should threaten and pressure him and Twitter until he shoves off into the abyss. The guy is an existential threat.
- kjellsbells 3y ago
  Consumer pressure (aka outrage, real or invented) is certainly a factor, but advertisers seem to be coming to the conclusion that X isn't worth the agita, independently of any given week's particular rumpus. If I'm the CMO of <bigcorp>, I can either be watching 24x7 for a blowup that is going to consume all my people and news cycles about my company for a week, or I can just give up on X and move my spend to, say, YouTube or Tiktok. I only have so many cycles in the day, and X no longer even gives me decent information about my reach (eg they withdrew from the MRC audit that advertisers use to validate reach). Pulling back is an easy decision. Like Elon said in his Dealbook interview last November, let's see where the chips fall.
RobRivera 3y ago
It isbalmost as if he is struggling to avoid responsibility and accountability for his actions.

throw310822 3y ago

> then he can't whine and complain if his customers (advertisers) decide to take their business elsewhere I said this so many times it's embarrassing, but the wrong assumption is that advertisers stop buying ads because somehow the content directly damages the brand. Which I think is super naive. The reality is that organisations and media who dislike the content threaten advertisers of organising campaigns against them if they don't boycott the platform. Consumer actions (right or wrong, doesn't matter) are almost never spontaneous, they need to be organised and promoted. There are organisations that have this as one of their core businesses and have an enormous ability to influence what is published. So Musk is not complaining about the fact that his advertisers are going elsewhere, but about the fact that political organisations are pressuring them to do so under threat of damaging their business.

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
Given how distasteful people find his actions, it's not surprising that people organize against them. Unless you're suggesting that his actions are viewed favorably by people (lol), but people are being brainwashed into acting in the opposite manner by some conspiracy of organizations. The more likely scenario is that most people think he acts like a douchebag, and most folks don't like associating with people who act like douchebags, and if those folks organize, more power to 'em.
ryanklee 3y ago
They should threaten and pressure him and Twitter until he shoves off into the abyss. The guy is an existential threat.
kjellsbells 3y ago
Consumer pressure (aka outrage, real or invented) is certainly a factor, but advertisers seem to be coming to the conclusion that X isn't worth the agita, independently of any given week's particular rumpus. If I'm the CMO of <bigcorp>, I can either be watching 24x7 for a blowup that is going to consume all my people and news cycles about my company for a week, or I can just give up on X and move my spend to, say, YouTube or Tiktok. I only have so many cycles in the day, and X no longer even gives me decent information about my reach (eg they withdrew from the MRC audit that advertisers use to validate reach). Pulling back is an easy decision. Like Elon said in his Dealbook interview last November, let's see where the chips fall.

RobRivera 3y ago

It isbalmost as if he is struggling to avoid responsibility and accountability for his actions.