5 ms·

Amazing. I could never imagine any person or corporation getting me to root for the ad industry.

by geophile 2y ago

big-green-man 2y ago
If someone can get you to root for the ad industry, maybe you need to reconsider your biases.
- defrost 2y ago
  My bias is toward less advertising. I'm not not inclined to support anyone demanding more advertising as a point of lawfare.
  - big-green-man 2y ago
    I don't think his goal here is to demand that advertisers pay him, and claims like that are absurd on their face. "How ridiculous someone must be to demand third parties contract with them" yes, very ridiculous, which is why you should be skeptical of such a statement, and examine the veracity of such a statement and reconsider the credibility of anyone who frames what is happening in that way. Their claim is that a ideologically motivated organization called the Global Alliance for Responsible Media was used to create an illegal cartel agreement between advertisers to shut them out. I think there's merit to that, this wasn't just independent companies deciding not to advertise there, this was a coordinated effort, brazenly so, people were cheering about it at the time. There's a case to be made at the very least, let's see how it plays out.
    - defrost 2y ago
      Looked at through a lens of normal practice their claim has little merit; GARM provides advice to members which members subscribe to and ask for, X-Twitter itself is a current GARM member. Members have individual agency (unless X-Twitter has joined a borg) and are under no obligation to follow the advice of GARM. I myself have been part of a company that provided advice to subscribers, it wasn't a cartel and not all subscribers followed the leads provided. The Register is UK based but captured the essence of the whine at play here, Musk told advertisers to fsck off, they did, and now he is upset they did so. That action itself will undermine Musk's case .. maybe it was a cartel action, probably it was not unexpected follow through in understandable reaction to Musk's attitudes and open armed welcoming and support of the kind of people that stoke far right rioting. As you say, we'll see how it plays out in court.
    - root_axis 2y ago
      > Their claim is that a ideologically motivated organization called the Global Alliance for Responsible Media Coordinating an ideologically motivated boycott is totally legal. Where they'd run into problems is if the coordination was meant to e.g. lower X's prices.
      - big-green-man 2y ago
        In sure that's the argument that the advertising cartel is going to argue, again we will see what happens in court.
- geophile 2y ago
  A story can have multiple bad guys. Some are worse than others, in a given context. For example: Liz Cheney is someone I would never vote for (not that I have had to make this decision), yet I applaud her role in the J6 hearings, and her attitude toward Trump in general.
- segasaturn 2y ago
  I don't support the ad industry at all, but I absolutely support their right to choose who they do business and associate with. It is a matter of personal freedom.

Amazing. I could never imagine any person or corporation getting me to root for the ad industry.

big-green-man 2y ago

If someone can get you to root for the ad industry, maybe you need to reconsider your biases.

defrost 2y ago
My bias is toward less advertising. I'm not not inclined to support anyone demanding more advertising as a point of lawfare.
- big-green-man 2y ago
  I don't think his goal here is to demand that advertisers pay him, and claims like that are absurd on their face. "How ridiculous someone must be to demand third parties contract with them" yes, very ridiculous, which is why you should be skeptical of such a statement, and examine the veracity of such a statement and reconsider the credibility of anyone who frames what is happening in that way. Their claim is that a ideologically motivated organization called the Global Alliance for Responsible Media was used to create an illegal cartel agreement between advertisers to shut them out. I think there's merit to that, this wasn't just independent companies deciding not to advertise there, this was a coordinated effort, brazenly so, people were cheering about it at the time. There's a case to be made at the very least, let's see how it plays out.
  - defrost 2y ago
    Looked at through a lens of normal practice their claim has little merit; GARM provides advice to members which members subscribe to and ask for, X-Twitter itself is a current GARM member. Members have individual agency (unless X-Twitter has joined a borg) and are under no obligation to follow the advice of GARM. I myself have been part of a company that provided advice to subscribers, it wasn't a cartel and not all subscribers followed the leads provided. The Register is UK based but captured the essence of the whine at play here, Musk told advertisers to fsck off, they did, and now he is upset they did so. That action itself will undermine Musk's case .. maybe it was a cartel action, probably it was not unexpected follow through in understandable reaction to Musk's attitudes and open armed welcoming and support of the kind of people that stoke far right rioting. As you say, we'll see how it plays out in court.
  - root_axis 2y ago
    > Their claim is that a ideologically motivated organization called the Global Alliance for Responsible Media Coordinating an ideologically motivated boycott is totally legal. Where they'd run into problems is if the coordination was meant to e.g. lower X's prices.
    - big-green-man 2y ago
      In sure that's the argument that the advertising cartel is going to argue, again we will see what happens in court.
geophile 2y ago
A story can have multiple bad guys. Some are worse than others, in a given context. For example: Liz Cheney is someone I would never vote for (not that I have had to make this decision), yet I applaud her role in the J6 hearings, and her attitude toward Trump in general.
segasaturn 2y ago
I don't support the ad industry at all, but I absolutely support their right to choose who they do business and associate with. It is a matter of personal freedom.