• DannyMac@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    11 months ago

    I like how he’s turning extwitter into 4chan. Advertisers hate it though, but advertising only accounts for 90% of their revenue, nbd

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t remember hearing what Jack Dorsey thought of anything.

      Musk has literally paid 30 billion to have his own private megaphone on the internet.

    • vivadanang@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      That’s ok, Muskoid is going to sue the ADL and Media Matters, and based on his extremely flawed ideas regarding Freedom Of Speech, he probably believes he can win lol.

      he’s such a fucking clown

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        His claim for suing Media Matters is that ads don’t always appear next to Neo-Nazis, therefore they had to hit refresh until one did.

        Which… they never said otherwise? And that doesn’t really change things?

        • vivadanang@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          right? they’ve illustrated it happens. Advertisers don’t want to be shown with nazi content, elon’s hosting nazi content, it’s really that simple.

        • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          11 months ago

          No, it’s that they didn’t for anyone organically. Media Matters essentially broke their advertising algo and pretended anyone else saw them.

            • squiblet@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              They followed specific people and topics (neonazis and major brands) to bring it about. Seems fine to me.

            • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              11 months ago

              That isn’t accurate - you can look up the details before getting all fussy. Of all the twitter users they were the only user that saw one pairing and one of the other pairings may have been seen by one actual user, but also might’ve just been MM seeing it twice.

              It wasn’t an organic thing and it’ll be interesting to see if it goes to court.

              • vivadanang@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                11 months ago

                It wasn’t an organic thing and it’ll be interesting to see if it goes to court.

                it was completely organic. no outside-twitter resources were used to achieve the result - they literally used twitter’s tools and proved it could happen readily. That’s all advertisers need to see to bug the fuck out.

                • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  We have different definitions of organic. I think the fact that only they saw some of the pairings shows it’s something no legitimate user did.

                  You don’t have to modify a lawn mower to flip it upside down and throw cats in it my friend.

                  • vivadanang@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    9
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    You don’t have to modify a lawn mower to flip it upside down and throw cats in it my friend.

                    no you just have to be a psychopath to suggest it.

                    did they break twitter, inject code, falsify user records, hack anything? No.

                    They used the service as it’s intended - picked some people and brands to follow then refreshed their feed. Buddy, that’s as organic as manure - and even if it somehow was gamed, dozens of other instances of hate shit being positioned aside brands THAT RIGHTFULLY DON’T WANT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH HATE SHIT have been posted - it’s not just media matters.

                    it’s not just the ADL’s criticism.

                    GET IT THROUGH YOUR FUCKING MELON - Musk’s the problem. Your refusal to see the obvious is sad.

                  • vxx@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    If your lawnmower is faulty and you find out after a couple of uses, I don’t claim it only counts if the lawnmower was used by each person once.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                11 months ago

                Even Twitter isn’t claiming that Media Matters somehow broke their algorithm (unsurprisingly, since that makes Twitter look terrible):

                The lawsuit filed Monday accuses Media Matters of publishing a report that distorted the likelihood of ads appearing beside extremist content on X, a move the social media company says led major and influential advertisers to suspend their campaigns en masse. The company alleges that the group’s testing methodology was not representative of how real users experience the site and calls for a judge to force Media Matters to take down the analysis.

                The case appears to be a “bogus” attempt to chill criticism in a way that “flatly contradicts basic First Amendment principles,” Ted Boutrous, a First Amendment attorney with years of experience dealing with the tech industry, told CNN. Boutrous added that the case could backfire for X in the discovery phase, as Media Matters could demand internal information that, if presented at trial, could prove embarrassing or highly damaging to the social media company.

                The lawsuit also contains “fatal flaws” by conceding that ads did, in fact, appear beside extremist content, regardless of how Media Matters achieved that result, according to Steve Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas and a CNN contributor.

                “The complaint admits that the thing Media Matters was making a big deal about actually happened,” Vladeck said. “Most companies wouldn’t want their ads running next to neo-Nazi content even once, and wouldn’t care about the exact percentage of users who were encountering such side-by-side placement.”

                Contrary to the complaint, Media Matters “never claimed that what it found was typical of other users’ experience,” Vladeck added.

                https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/21/tech/elon-musk-texas-lawsuit-media-matters/index.html

                • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  They contrived a situation that literally happened to nobody else. You’ll have to excuse my liberty with the word broken, but this is a non-issue.

                  If it wasn’t musk none of us would give a fuck. If a right wing propaganda mill did the same thing everyone would happily admit it’s misleading. The fact that it gets any traction at all is so fucking depressing.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    They contrived a situation that literally happened to nobody else.

                    How do you know? You’re taking Twitter’s word for it. Why?

              • squiblet@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Musk and Yaccarino claim hat it wasn’t displayed that way to any regular users. We have no way of verifying that.

                • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  You can read my other comments. They filed a lawsuit referring to their analytics. If it’s a lie it will come out in discovery.

                  • squiblet@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    I’m aware of that. However, Twitter’s own records are the sole source of this information. If they managed to falsify it without text messages or emails, how would the court find that out? How could anyone verify whether the records are complete and accurate in the first place?

    • jaybone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      What’s the advertising like on 4chan? I haven’t been on there in like 15 years. Maybe there were banner ads last time I was on there lol.

      • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        Weeb merch, dick pills and malicious links. So pretty much what it’s always been tbh.