7 ms·
Companies that have no political ideologies except to make as much money as they can, resume doing <insert whatever self serving behavior it is> the minute it’s
by darth_avocado 2y ago
Companies that have no political ideologies except to make as much money as they can, resume doing <insert whatever self serving behavior it is> the minute it’s profitable to do so.
There, I fixed the headlines for you.
- programmerpass 2y agoIt was profitable to do so a year ago, it was simply dangerous politically. Now given Trump is in office and aligned with Musk, it’s politically beneficial. That seems to be the truth.
- ramraj07 2y agoIf anything it's politically dangerous not to advertise there.
- darth_avocado 2y ago> It was profitable to do so a year ago, it was simply dangerous politically. Explain? Because if it was politically dangerous, it automatically means it wasn’t profitable.
- programmerpass 2y agoIf an activity is profitable but the government can prosecute you for taking place in that activity, there in no correlation. That’s the point. Advertising was dangerous because there was a perception that the previous US government would politically prosecute anyone who opposed them. Companies advertising on X, and hence supporting opposition such as Musk, would fall into this category.
- bko 2y agoThe world is healing. Seriously though, I certainly don’t want my companies to have political ideologies. Follow the law, be good to customers and serve everyone.
- programmerpass 2y agoAgreed.
- eggsandbeer 2y ago[flagged]
- scarface_74 2y agoApple isn’t following the law right now either. They just brought TikTok back to the App Store based on Trump’s promises. But it is still breaking the law.
- neilpomerleau 2y agoApple never brought it back to the App Store. TikTok has to be sideloaded in the US: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqldw5y4y0no https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqldw5y4y0no
- gnabgib 2y agohttps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-14/apple-to-restore-tiktok-to-us-app-store-following-justice-department-letter https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-14/apple-to-... https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/13/technology/tiktok-apple-google-app-stores.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/13/technology/tiktok-apple-g... https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/apple-google-tiktok-app-stores-rcna192154 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/apple-google-tiktok-app... https://www.theverge.com/news/612768/tiktok-app-store-apple-google-us-ban https://www.theverge.com/news/612768/tiktok-app-store-apple-...
- ivewonyoung 2y agoI wonder of all the people who read this comment and also drove today, what percentage violated speeding laws. The TikTok law was meant to force divesture to a US company. The Supreme Court ruled on the legality of it at the very last minute, so there is broad bipartisan support for more time to find an acquirer, including Biden saying he won't enforce it on the last day in office. They know a lot of Americans depend on it for livelihood and entertainment.
- GuB-42 2y agoThe corollary is that advertising on X is now profitable for Apple. Which is useful information. Of course companies put money before political ideology, as a public company, it can be considered an obligation to their shareholders. The part that matters is that their customers may have political ideologies, and it is important for a company to match the ideologies of the customers who make them the most money, at least in appearance.
- fredophile 2y agoMy uniformed guess is that this is profitable to Apple in the same way that money spent on lobbyists is profitable.
- JeremyNT 2y agoYeah, bribing your industry's top regulator seems highly likely to have a positive ROI.
- programmerpass 2y agoThere should be a law in place whereby if you a prove a company was engaged in profitable advertising or activities and stopped doing those activities in response to political stances the company can be prosecuted. Not sure where this would fit into the law though something like this would certainly curtail cancel culture like activity.
- darth_avocado 2y agoCompanies also have first amendment rights.
- scarface_74 2y agoYou’re going to make a company work with another company?
- programmerpass 2y agoThe inverse: ensure companies that are already working with companies are not leaving them for illegitimate reasons.
- fredophile 2y agoWho decides what reasons are legitimate?
- programmerpass 2y agoGreat question. I don’t have a good answer. Could a be a “facts and circumstances” type of legislation similar to the IRS. Many IRS rules go back to the “facts and circumstances” of a particular case to evaluate all the nuances relating to it.
- fredophile 2y agoI'm still not clear why you think this would be a good idea. Obviously you have opinions on what is "legitimate" in these situations. Can you explain more about this and how it wouldn't be a first ammendment violation to create such a law? What "facts and circumstances" are we interested in? Your original post mentioned ending business relationships due to political stances. Did you mean the political stance of the advertisers, the platform hosting ads, some third party or parties, a combination of the above, or something I've missed?
- prawn 2y agoHave advertising rates on Twitter changed significantly over recent years? I wonder if that is a factor at all.
- lenerdenator 2y agoWell, most don't have an ideology. Twitter does, though.