- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Can you please tag this elon, so that our spam filters work?
It’s not practical to censor “x”
What about censoring " x ". That might help filter more posts.
This post would require "x " though.
Sounds like it’s time for people to learn regex.
Yup:
\<[xX]\>should do it, or whatever your regex engine’s word break character is (sometimes\b).
Hey Elmo, you told the advertisers to “go fuck yourself” in no uncertain terms, even repeating yourself for dramatic effect.
Hey I’ve got an idea Elmo. Go fuck yourself.
In a sane world, this lawsuit would be laughed out of court.
It’s harder to laugh it out of court when the plaintiff is in the government himself.
I didn’t know Citizens United gave companies forced speech.
Nobody wants either side to actually win, we’ll root for whoever is currently more messed up hoping they’ll make a comeback and prolong the fight.
Maybe asking advertisers to ‘go fuck yourselves’ isn’t such a bright idea, fuckwit.
You just know that’s going to be exhibit 1 for the defense.
Fucking fascist Nazi man baby doesn’t like when advertisers do what he tells them, and then continues to do so when he realizes that was a bad idea.
when advertisers do what he tells them
They have actually … themselves?
;-)
Reminds me of the guy who was accused by his gf of impregnating her, then refusing to support the child. Went through everything: the lawyers, friends and family who questioned his manhood and unwilling ess to take responsibility for the child, harassment, threats from her friends, etc. finally ended up in court in front of a judge, where he calmly produced a letter from a doctor that had performed a vasectomy on him well before the child could possibly have been conceived, took the win and walked out.
I would pay to watch this rich spoilt man child have to eat his literal words. I’m sure it’s screenshotted all over the internet, but his ego won’t let him see the truth.
FYI a vasectomy isn’t a 100% guarantee against getting a woman pregnant as it can sometimes heal, even years after.
A DNA test should still have been ordered in that circumstance.
Yeah any judge should have just waited for a paternity test.
Hey, when you’re rich you can grab them by the balls.
*corpussy
You can also have friends if you just pay mercenaries to kidnap them from the street at gunpoint. Many many great friends at any time.
What an ugly fuck Elon is. Ewwww
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2069436850145993
50 States, 50 Protests, 1day
Feb 5 @ your downtown.
The irony of using one fascist billionaires platform to organize against another fascist billionaire and his platform, but also the government.
Can you screenshot that or something. I can’t see it without the Facebook account I refuse to have.
I can’t see it either. I’m not on Facebook. Someone found more details by googling it.
Organizing on Facebook? Wtaf.
facebook
That’s a no from me dawg.
You know you’ve fucked up when even Nestlé doesn’t want to work with you…
Obligatory Fuck Nesté
When people go we may use child slaves in our supply chain, steal and ruin water supplies, and bribe medical professionals to get discourage breastfeeding, but you’re too fucked up for us to work with then you know you’ve fucked up.
To be clear, its not that twitter is too fucked up for nestle to work with, they absolutely would if they thought it would benefit them. Its that twitter has become so toxic that they see advertising there as a net negative.
How long until Tesla sues me for buying a Toyota?
Currently scheduled for 18th of March.
Just in time for Toyotathon
Or is Toyotathon in time for this? The world may never know…
Oh yes Nestle, the infamously lefty liberals.
i wounder if he will actually get a court to order that every person in the world owes him money.
cause that seems to be what he is working towards.
No, the case is that advertisers used an Ad Advisory Group called GARM, that monitored advertising platforms on their quality, like being family friendly and keeping things within the law. When they advised their customers that they could no longer vouch for X, many advertisers followed their guidance.
Obviously they are in their right to do so, and there was absolutely nothing wrong with the procedures that were followed, like it was NOT cartel or any other kind of shenanigans by the users of that service.
But Musk being a paranoid malignant narcissistic crybaby, saw it as a conspiracy directed against him personally. And the guy has more money than sense, so he is making a huge issue out of it.
Luckily USA is a nation of law, so he won’t get anywhere with that, just like he wouldn’t get away with calling people pedophiles for no other reason than to offend them. Thank god USA isn’t corrupt as hell, so we can trust the courts to do the right thing. /s
On the other hand we also have EU warning against advertising on X:
https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/11/17/eu-commission-advises-services-to-stop-advertising-on-elon-musks-xEU warning against advertising on X
… and Musk supporting anti-EU parties.
The eu commission warning was officially only aimed at their internal services, it wasn’t a mandate that all organisations within the eu should stop advertising on x. Though it wouldn’t surprise me if it comes to a total ban in the eu, X is already under investigation for disinformation.
it wasn’t a mandate
Yes it was “just” a warning for EU offices, But that’s still pretty remarkable, and this warning is widely publicly known, and I bet companies take notice.
But the point was also, that it’s not just GARM that had problems with how things are at Xitter, it’s official from EU that it’s not desirable to use Xitter anymore, based on much the same reasons GARM stated. For theirrecommendationwarning to avoid advertising on Xitter.So it’s evidence that GARM didn’t just make it up to harm Xitter. The same conclusions were reached elsewhere.
Though it wouldn’t surprise me if it comes to a total ban in the eu, X is already under investigation for disinformation.
We should absolutely do that, and introduce a special Tesla Tariff of 200%, due to unfair competition because the Tesla CEO is part of the government, and it is a blatantly conflict of interest for Musk to be there and be CEO of several companies at the same time.
Jimmy Carter sold his beloved Peanut Farm exactly to avoid a conflict of interest, but the American politicians, the public and the media today don’t give a shit about corruption. But it’s still illegal in EU.
Let me ask you this: how many ads have you run on Twitter? Does that strike you as fair?
I’m torn about disliking this douchebag and liking that Nestlé is getting sued…
On the scale of who is fucking up the world more, I’d have to award the trophy to Leon. Certainly fuck Nestle, but won’t someone please rid us of this meddlesome billionaire?
Elon is a twat and a menace for sure, but Nestlé have employed business strategies that literally killed infants and caused malnourishment…they are a completely different league of evil, far far worse than what Elon has done so far.
Key part of that sentence is “so far”
Last year he told everybody to go fuck themselves. Now he’s crying. If there is somebody who needs to be deported, is it his narcistic, selfish, apartheid’s ass.
Yea, in a sane justice system, that one tweet would rpget this case thrown out on day 1. In the world we now live in, I’m not so sure.
Can someone explain to me how you can sue over a business choosing to not spend their advertising dollars on a particular service? I mean Elon specifically told his customers to “fuck off” and now he’s suing them?!? I just don’t understand these petulant little man children being so litigious when they get their feefees hurt.
You can sue for anything.
Easy, you pack courts with shills, you eliminate government oversight, and then you do whatever you want.
The actual “easy” part is that you can sue anyone for pretty much anything. Suing is entirely different from winning the case.
Why they think they have a chance of winning is the weirder question, especially when Musk publically told the advertisers to go fuck themselves.
Paying a couple of five or six figure sums to continue advertising on X, versus paying millions to fight a protracted legal battle - I know which option the shareholders of those companies will be pushing for.
Don’t have to win, just drag the case out, causing both sides to spend fortunes on legal fees. Guess who has the most money.
X has an estimated market cap of $9.4 billion, whereas Nestlé has a market cap of $219 billion. That’s a corporate superpower with no qualms about monopolizing freshwater or bait- & switching breast milk formula from babies. And it’s just one of the companies they’re taking on, with a shitty case to boot. So yeah… if I was Elon I would keep my head down.
I hate this timeline so much.
Maybe it’ll turn around after the Bell protests
You mean the Bell Riots that started September 1, 2024? I’m not sure how to tell you this, but that didn’t happen on schedule.
Here’s the claim from the article:
The complaint alleges that the WFA “organized an advertiser boycott of Twitter through GARM, with the goal of coercing Twitter to comply with the GARM Brand Safety Standards to the satisfaction of GARM.” And it claims that these efforts succeeded in harming Twitter/X, with “at least” 18 GARM-affiliated advertisers stopping their purchase of ads on Twitter between November and December 2022, and other advertisers “substantially” reducing their spending.
Sure thing! I found an article that explains it better than I could:
Oh man. I wish OP would have posted this first.
Instead of someone explaining, you could always read the article linked and see for yourself.
I did read the article.
For example how does this:
In fact, the lawsuit claims that ad prices on X “remain well below those charged by X’s closest competitors in the social media advertising market,” so “by refraining from purchasing advertising from X, boycotting advertisers are forgoing a valuable opportunity to purchase low-priced advertising inventory on a platform with brand safety that meets or exceeds industry standards.”
force someone or some company to spend their advertising dollars there. If a company spending ad money doesn’t like what the ad service represents, in this case Elon is a douchebag and we’ll just ignore the fact that he gave a Nazi salute at the inauguration, than they aren’t required to use them as a service, illegal boycott or not, which I don’t even believe is a thing.
Here’s a hyperbolic argument. Let’s just say for example we have two grocery stores. One promotes pedophilia and the other does not. The pedo grocery store has prices that are let’s say half of what the other grocery store is, because I don’t know fucking kids makes you feel generous. A bunch of people get together and decide they don’t wanna shop at NAMBLAmart. Is NAMBLAmart allow to sue me because I didn’t shop there?
Because unless I’m missing something, that’s pretty much the argument.
I think the attempted argument is anti-competitive collusion among all these companies. That GARM, fundamentally, is illegal as an anti-competitive initiative.
Thank you. This is exactly what kind of response I was looking for. I couldn’t find any logic in the argument at all. So essentially the organization is illegal. That at least makes some sense.
Edit: I mean I still think it’s bullshit but I can understand the argument now.
