Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, they just don't want to be associated with nutcases, conspiracy theorists and disseminators of misinformation and lies. Makes sense to me.
I think Twitter is better off not being associated anymore with the most criminal Pharmaceutical company of all time (in terms of adjudicated fines) - Pfizer.
Now hopefully Twitter will no longer promote misinformation by advertising their garbage products.
They pulled their advertisement 'presumably' because the new owner will allow conservatives to have equal footing on Twitter. Seems pretty cut and dried.
The new owner is Elon Musk. Are you aware of that? Elon Musk is a private individual, not the government. Even before Elon Musk, it was a public company.
I don't see how you're tying this to free speech in any way. Private businesses and private people have the freedom to run their businesses as they wish (with exception to discrimination as described in discrimination laws).
The new owner is Elon Musk. Are you aware of that? Elon Musk is a private individual, not the government. Even before Elon Musk, it was a public company.
I don't see how you're tying this to free speech in any way. Private businesses and private people have the freedom to run their businesses as they wish (with exception to discrimination as described in discrimination laws). To deny that freedom would be UnAmerican.
Let's not play coy. Sure, it was a public company, but we've already been shown proof that the government hand their fingers in that company telling them what to push, what to hide etc. Those advertisers seemed cool with that arrangement.
Secondly, once Musk took over a great wave of weeping leftists began to push for an advertiser boycott which then, lo and behold, happened. Why did this happen? Because Musk outright said he's going to make Twitter a free speech platform.
If you aren't seeing the connection it is because you are choosing not to.
Let's not play coy. Sure, it was a public company, but we've already been shown proof that the government hand their fingers in that company telling them what to push, what to hide etc. Those advertisers seemed cool with that arrangement.
Secondly, once Musk took over a great wave of weeping leftists began to push for an advertiser boycott which then, lo and behold, happened. Why did this happen? Because Musk outright said he's going to make Twitter a free speech platform.
If you aren't seeing the connection it is because you are choosing not to.
Rand Paul is already proposing legislation to make sure the government doesn't work with big tech to censor information.
But advertisers pulling out of Twitter has nothing to do with free speech. It's their choice based on their brand safety. You're going to extreme lengths to justify that this is a free speech issue. It's not. Did you try the same thing when Tumblr went through the exact same thing with censorship and advertisers?
If Elon is making a platform that nurtures uncensored speech, that's great. It's on him to come up with a business model that works as clearly in an industry where 3P is going away, and where context and brand safety are more important than a couple years ago, advertisers are not going to take the risk.
Mad? Not at all. I'm voting with my wallet which at least for now is my right as an American. You are simply incorrect. Carry on.
And American companies are voting with their wallets. Anything that hurts their brands, hurts their bottom lines, which makes their shareholders unhappy. It’s about profits, not morality.
Obviously before this, the companies didn’t feel their brands were vulnerable or they would have taken a similar action then.
And American companies are voting with their wallets. Anything that hurts their brands, hurts their bottom lines, which makes their shareholders unhappy. It’s about profits, not morality.
Obviously before this, the companies didn’t feel their brands were vulnerable or they would have taken a similar action then.
Liberals will never understand that companies have the freedom to choose how they do business based on what's best for their investors.
Liberals will never understand that companies have the freedom to choose how they do business based on what's best for their investors.
Of course liberals understand that. That's why they understand why some of these companies are doing what they're doing. They don't want to be associated with the crazy that Musk is going to be unleashing.
great, exactly the same as others who chose to boycott companies.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
