Twitter is better

[Ohio Elite]

8 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

Disney is on the winning side of the war on Woke.  Ask Meatball Ron's campaign director for confirmation.

Their shareholders would say differently.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Ohio Elite
Grammmmmerererer

[jross]

20 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

1. ...But it is never his fault.

2. ...It is some evil cabal out to get him.

3. ...He is just too toxic a presence...

4. ...These are customers, sorry, were customers, who he is, in theory, trying to win business from, not enemies attacking him. 

5. It isn't about freedom of speech. It is about actions having consequences.

1. Are you familiar that Musk has apologized multiple times for different tweets?
2. Is it accurate to refer to Media Matters as evidence of an evil cabal out to get him?  MM is being sued for directly trying to cancel X through underhanded action.
3. What do the high user counts and average time on X > 30m daily indicate?
4. Why could Musk see Disney/Bob as an enemy?  Perhaps because they are not supportive of how X is trying to manage the balance of free speech with restricted reach.  Maybe Disney is the activist!  Or maybe Disney will not stand up to Activists.  Musk's attitude might be, "If you are not with me, you are against me," and it sounds like Disney is trying to negotiate X's behavior in order to advertise.  I may fire Disney for not supporting X amongst other reasons. 
5. Content moderation relates to freedom of speech relates to 'actions having consequences.' 
   • Remember that Media Matters were there to tell us that hate speech/slurs increased when Musk laid off the Safety group at Twitter. 
   • Remember that Twitter X took a hit initially on increased hate impressions before reducing it to levels below the Musk acquisition.  X accomplished this mainly by banning bots and through other means (sprinklr).  
   • X gave control to advertisers with new projects like Adjacency Controls and Sensitivity Settings.  According to third-party measurement partnerships Integral Ad Science and DoubleVerify, the average brand safety score on X is now >99%, and brand suitability scores were at >97% when these controls were applied.
   • Since mid-May, all major agencies reversed their pause guidance against advertising on X.  Last quarter, 1700+ advertisers returned to X – including 90 of the top 100 ad spenders from a year ago (blog). 
   • Re-enter Media Matters to execute devious behavior to smear X's brand safety and suitability features. 
   • Just as advertisers apply consequences to X, both X and Advertisers should hold activists accountable for their behaviors. 
   • I suppose Community Notes could be a negative influence on advertisers...  advertisers don't like being fact-checked

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, jross said:

1. Are you familiar that Musk has apologized multiple times for different tweets? Yes, but that is the problem, not the solution. Having to apologize over and over means he never learns anything. Stop doing things you need to apologize for. But he is so rich that he is divorced from reality.
2. Is it accurate to refer to Media Matters as evidence of an evil cabal out to get him?  MM is being sued for directly trying to cancel X through underhanded action. No, it is not, so he should stop treating them that way. He should respect their freedom of speech, but for him that only goes in one direction. He is like a little kid who thinks sharing means you give to me.
3. What do the high user counts and average time on X > 30m daily indicate? Advertisers only care about user counts if you first take care of the basics, like not having your owner using your product to amplify anti-Semitic messages, for example. Absent that, user counts are meaningless. And user counts only pay your bills to the extent you can monetize those user counts, by having, you know, advertisers.
4. Why could Musk see Disney/Bob as an enemy?  Perhaps because they are not supportive of how X is trying to manage the balance of free speech with restricted reach.  Maybe Disney is the activist!  Or maybe Disney will not stand up to Activists.  Musk's attitude might be, "If you are not with me, you are against me," and it sounds like Disney is trying to negotiate X's behavior in order to advertise.  I may fire Disney for not supporting X amongst other reasons. Everyone seems to want to reduce this to Disney. There are soooooo many advertisers who have left Twitter. It aint about Disney. It is about making your dues paying true customers run for the hills.
5. Content moderation relates to freedom of speech relates to 'actions having consequences.' You are ignoring Musk's own Tweet history. Which is precisely what he would like everyone to do. He just is not a victim here. All of his problems are self-inflicted.
   • Remember that Media Matters were there to tell us that hate speech/slurs increased when Musk laid off the Safety group at Twitter. 
   • Remember that Twitter X took a hit initially on increased hate impressions before reducing it to levels below the Musk acquisition.  X accomplished this mainly by banning bots and through other means (sprinklr).  
   • X gave control to advertisers with new projects like Adjacency Controls and Sensitivity Settings.  According to third-party measurement partnerships Integral Ad Science and DoubleVerify, the average brand safety score on X is now >99%, and brand suitability scores were at >97% when these controls were applied.
   • Since mid-May, all major agencies reversed their pause guidance against advertising on X.  Last quarter, 1700+ advertisers returned to X – including 90 of the top 100 ad spenders from a year ago (blog). 
   • Re-enter Media Matters to execute devious behavior to smear X's brand safety and suitability features. 
   • Just as advertisers apply consequences to X, both X and Advertisers should hold activists accountable for their behaviors. 
   • I suppose Community Notes could be a negative influence on advertisers...  advertisers don't like being fact-checked

Musk's current situation is another argument for Twitter going public. As a private company, that he owns primarily, but not solely, the only way to value it is on revenue, growth, and profitability. This is why every institutional investor has written down their investments and why his lenders cannot securitize his loans and have had to write them down at significant loses, too. 

But as a public company its stock trades for whatever price it trades for. It can be as divorced from profitability as you want and still be valuable. In the current age of meme stocks bankrupt companies can raise money by selling worthless stock (while stating prominently that it is worthless, hello, Bed Bath and Beyond), video game stores can claim to be reinventing the world. All is possible. You just need to be a meme. And no one has ever done that better than Elon Musk.

[Plasmodium]

4 hours ago, Ohio Elite said:

Their shareholders would say differently.

Both sides are diminished in a cultural war but only one side is vanquished!

[Wrestleknownothing]

4 hours ago, Ohio Elite said:

Their shareholders would say differently.

Twitter shareholders may be bigger losers.

[Plasmodium]

4 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Twitter shareholders may be bigger losers.

No, they were the winners.

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 minute ago, Plasmodium said:

No, they were the winners.

I mean current shateholders. Musk, Fidelity, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, Jack Dorsey, Larry Ellison, and perhaps others.

[ThreePointTakedown]

13 hours ago, mspart said:

And when the government is advising the business of which content should be censored?   Then that becomes part of the question.   And that is what happened as demonstrated by the Twitter files.  

mspart

Does advising equal force? 

Has anyone said they will take vengeance on companies or organizations that oppose or have wronged them? 

[jross]

@Wrestleknownothing

Why is Bill Ackman wrong in his informed opinion?   

1. X is treated unfairly and inconsistently by advertisers
2. Musk is targeted because the other media organizations view X
   as a competitor and controversies increase clicks/revenue
3. The Disney(s) cave to public pressure in a way that is not in their best interest
4. Musk did not have antisemitic intent when he responded with the ‘actual truth’ tweet
5. Musk is correct in saying that Jews should rethink support for organizations that seek their elimination.
6. Earth is fortunate that X is owned by an individual that is largely insulated from financial and other influence.

About Bill (mainly from Wikipedia)

• He is a longtime donor to Democratic candidates and organizations
• He is a signatory of The Giving Pledge, committing himself to give away at least 50% of his wealth by the end of his life to charitable causes.
• Ackman has given to charitable causes such as the Center for Jewish History, where he spearheaded a successful effort to retire $30 million in debt, personally contributing $6.8 million.  
• Ackman's foundation donated $1.1 million to the Innocence Project in New York City and Centurion Ministries in Princeton, New Jersey.
• Is an American billionaire hedge fund manager who is the founder and chief executive officer of Pershing Square Capital Management. 
  • From a counter view, the main angle is to propose Bill is a fraud protecting his investment, namely...
    • PSCM invested in Twitter with principles of free speech and is holding their investment in Twitter for the long term without concern for immediate profit. (from the above tweet)
  • I think Bill's tweet was well-spoken, well-informed, and well-reasoned from the larger context available.
• Is Jewish
• Pro Palestine, Pro Israel, Anti Hamas (Tweet)

[Plasmodium]

7 minutes ago, jross said:

@Wrestleknownothing

Why is Bill Ackman wrong in his informed opinion?   

1. X is treated unfairly and inconsistently by advertisers
2. Musk is targeted because the other media organizations view X
   as a competitor and controversies increase clicks/revenue
3. The Disney(s) cave to public pressure in a way that is not in their best interest
4. Musk did not have antisemitic intent when he responded with the ‘actual truth’ tweet
5. Musk is correct in saying that Jews should rethink support for organizations that seek their elimination.
6. Earth is fortunate that X is owned by an individual that is largely insulated from financial and other influence.

About Bill (mainly from Wikipedia)

• He is a longtime donor to Democratic candidates and organizations
• He is a signatory of The Giving Pledge, committing himself to give away at least 50% of his wealth by the end of his life to charitable causes.
• Ackman has given to charitable causes such as the Center for Jewish History, where he spearheaded a successful effort to retire $30 million in debt, personally contributing $6.8 million.  
• Ackman's foundation donated $1.1 million to the Innocence Project in New York City and Centurion Ministries in Princeton, New Jersey.
• Is an American billionaire hedge fund manager who is the founder and chief executive officer of Pershing Square Capital Management. 
  • From a counter view, the main angle is to propose Bill is a fraud protecting his investment, namely...
    • PSCM invested in Twitter with principles of free speech and is holding their investment in Twitter for the long term without concern for immediate profit. (from the above tweet)
  • I think Bill's tweet was well-spoken, well-informed, and well-reasoned from the larger context available.
• Is Jewish
• Pro Palestine, Pro Israel, Anti Hamas (Tweet)

Don't forget 

7) These problems didn't exist at Twitter.

8 ) X is responsible for X.

Edited December 1, 2023 by Plasmodium

[Plasmodium]

It is amazing to me that a man can keep and foster such loyalty to an obviously failed paradigm.

He literally said the biggest social media  mistake he has ever made was to attach his name, and therefore X itself, to an antisemitic post.  In virtually the next breath he tells advertisers to go ***duck** themselves for doing the same thing.  We live in amazing times.  Post was still up yesterday, so he also has that.

[jross]

It's different.

X killed mainstream media for me. 

X is the main news source outside of wrestling sites that I'm willing to pay for.

[Plasmodium]

Genuinely curious.  How does X replace MSM?  Do you only consume content from original creators like Tucker Carlson?   Consume pundit interpretations of MSM?

[Wrestleknownothing]

@jross

Why is Bill Ackman wrong in his informed opinion?   

1. X is treated unfairly and inconsistently by advertisers That is impossible to say. No other company has Musk doing what Musk is doing. Advertisers are responding to his actions, not the other way around.
2. Musk is targeted because the other media organizations view X as a competitor and controversies increase clicks/revenue If the current version of Twitter.com is a competitor, so was the old version of Twitter.com. Little has changed in that respect save for one minor element. Musk.
3. The Disney(s) cave to public pressure in a way that is not in their best interest How do you measure this? They are clearly acting in what they believe to be their own best interests as fiduciaries for the investors. But the definition of that has certainly changed over time. It used to only be about profits (except in extreme cases), but now there are "other stakeholders" to consider. That is a whole other topic. But how do you measure their best interest to determine they are not acting in it. In Musk's case he does not appear to be acting in his own best interest. He hired a CEO specifically charged with getting advertisers back, and one with a background in advertising at one of his target clients, then he goes out of his way to make her job impossible.
4. Musk did not have antisemitic intent when he responded with the ‘actual truth’ tweet I do not know his intent, nor do you I suspect. I do know the impact of his amplification of anti-Semitic messages. It also seems like this is a very predictable outcome. But Musk is nothing if not impulsive when it comes to his Tweeting. It is the reason he has had to apologize for it so many times.
5. Musk is correct in saying that Jews should rethink support for organizations that seek their elimination. I do not know what you are saying here.
6. Earth is fortunate that X is owned by an individual that is largely insulated from financial and other influence. I thoroughly enjoy that Musk bought Twitter. The entertainment value for me is very high. The earth being fortunate seems a bit bombastic. And by a bit I mean a lot.

Edited December 1, 2023 by Wrestleknownothing

[Wrestleknownothing]

On 11/30/2023 at 12:27 PM, jross said:

2. Musk said "Are you going to try to blackmail me with money?  Go ***duck** yourself."  

That statement always seemed wrong to me, but I couldn't put my finger on it. Then it hit me, duh. Musk doesn't know the definition of blackmail. This situation is the opposite of blackmail.

The classical blackmail framework is:

1. I find out something that will embarass you,

2. I threaten to reveal this information publicly,

3. Unless YOU pay ME money.

This framework is:

1. I am buying a service from you,

2. You reveal something embarassing about yourself,

3. I stop paying YOU money.

Do you see how those are different things? Apparently, Musk does not.

[headshuck]

Maybe there will be a wholesale change of who the advertisers on X will be. For every Disney there is a Home Depot.

[Offthemat]

It’s circular, isn’t it?  One business saying “I don’t want your customers to be my customers.”  And vice versa?

[Wrestleknownothing]

5 hours ago, headshuck said:

Maybe there will be a wholesale change of who the advertisers on X will be. For every Disney there is a Home Depot.

 

44 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

It’s circular, isn’t it?  One business saying “I don’t want your customers to be my customers.”  And vice versa?

I am reminded of the expession, hope is not a strategy.

[Offthemat]

28 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

 

I am reminded of the expession, hope is not a strategy.

It might be better than a bad strategy.  

[Wrestleknownothing]

13 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

It might be better than a bad strategy.  

It might also be worse.

But, I think it is safe to say Musk is pursuing a bad strategy.

It seems to illustrate the fallacy of thinking expertise in one domain translates to all domains. It cannot be denied that Musk has shown a genius for guiding engineers. Tesla and SpaceX are spectacular achievements, but boy is he shitting the bed with Twitter.

[headshuck]

I think we’ll be surprised when X becomes much more than a social media site.

[Offthemat]

25 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

It might also be worse.

But, I think it is safe to say Musk is pursuing a bad strategy.

It seems to illustrate the fallacy of thinking expertise in one domain translates to all domains. It cannot be denied that Musk has shown a genius for guiding engineers. Tesla and SpaceX are spectacular achievements, but boy is he shitting the bed with Twitter.

That may be, but if it’s profitable to advertise on X, what are you going to do?

[GreatWhiteNorth]

11 minutes ago, headshuck said:

I think we’ll be surprised when X becomes much more than a social media site.

We'll all be surprised and amazed if Xwitter becomes much more than a social media site.

[jross]

23 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

That statement always seemed wrong to me, but I couldn't put my finger on it. Then it hit me, duh. Musk doesn't know the definition of blackmail. This situation is the opposite of blackmail.

Excellent point.  I agree. 

Disney(s) can reframe "This isn't blackmail, it is conditional advertising."

X can reframe it as "Okay... this isn't blackmail; it is coercive negotiation and pressure tactics to direct our policies on free speech.  Go ***duck** yourself!"

[jross]

On 12/1/2023 at 4:11 PM, Wrestleknownothing said:

@jross

Why is Bill Ackman wrong in his informed opinion?   

1. X is treated unfairly and inconsistently by advertisers Agree about Musk but not about X.  There is plenty of toxic content on TikTok, Instragram, etc. and we don't hear about advertisement boycotts. (JROSS)

 

1. Musk is targeted because the other media organizations view X as a competitor and controversies increase clicks/revenue If the current version of Twitter.com is a competitor, so was the old version of Twitter.com. Little has changed in that respect save for one minor element. Musk.  Except I averaged 0 minutes daily on Twitter and over 30 minutes daily on X.  My news source starts with X where it did not before.  There may be others like me.  (JROSS)

 

1. The Disney(s) cave to public pressure in a way that is not in their best interest How do you measure this? They are clearly acting in what they believe to be their own best interests as fiduciaries for the investors. But the definition of that has certainly changed over time. It used to only be about profits (except in extreme cases), but now there are "other stakeholders" to consider. That is a whole other topic. But how do you measure their best interest to determine they are not acting in it. In Musk's case he does not appear to be acting in his own best interest. He hired a CEO specifically charged with getting advertisers back, and one with a background in advertising at one of his target clients, then he goes out of his way to make her job impossible.  My family doesn't watch newer Disney shows by self-choice and they are good with cancelling the service.  I hold Disney stock that I may sell.  I am headed to Florida and we are not visiting Disney. I will check later if their stream users is up or down as well as theme parks and cruise lines.  (JROSS)

 

1. Musk did not have antisemitic intent when he responded with the ‘actual truth’ tweet I do not know his intent, nor do you I suspect. I do know the impact of his amplification of anti-Semitic messages. It also seems like this is a very predictable outcome. But Musk is nothing if not impulsive when it comes to his Tweeting. It is the reason he has had to apologize for it so many times.  I only know what he has tweeted and said in interviews about intent, and I assume his words and actions are honest. (JROSS)

 

1. Musk is correct in saying that Jews should rethink support for organizations that seek their elimination. I do not know what you are saying here. Have you read what Musk has said in interviews and tweets?  ~ There are communities within Democratic Jews that support open immigration policies that increase the proximity of anti-Jews to the same Jewish communities. (JROSS)

 

1. Earth is fortunate that X is owned by an individual that is largely insulated from financial and other influence. I thoroughly enjoy that Musk bought Twitter. The entertainment value for me is very high. The earth being fortunate seems a bit bombastic. And by a bit I mean a lot.  Agreed(JROSS).

Thanks for the direct responses.  See mine inline.

Edited December 3, 2023 by jross
premature post while trying to format