I told my team to pause our $750K/month Twitter ads budget last week
teamblind.com
teamblind.com
My mind can be changed though. Can you provide some specific examples of this discourse now that rises above the level of the shit that Farrakhan says?
Also, I asked for an example of this recent discourse that is worse that the types o comments Farrakhan has made, do you have some examples?
Don't be confused about the brand safety stuff, that's a core advertising issue, and not even the biggest one. But it is important, if you are paying to get your brand good advertising, and instead it shows up next to content that negatively impacts the impression of your brand, you won't keep buying that.
I'm surprised all the Elon fans aren't critical of the fact that he fired all the people in the department responsible for taking customer money. 5D chess indeed !
The only point that really matters as far as ads are concerned is the first one, but without numbers it’s not much to go on.
In other words, it’s not a very useful article for how non-virtue signaling companies will respond.
* Ad purchasers having little tolerance for being placed next to racists posts made by the user’s own subscribers and the user’s own content choices is a recent phenomenon, and is literally the definition of virtue signaling
Not wanting your advertisements displayed right next to objectionable content is not 'virtue signalling' lol.
"the action or practice of publicly expressing opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one's good character or the moral correctness of one's position on a particular issue."
Thinking that it might be bad for brand reputation to have engagement with your posts to be filled with antisemitism and porn isn't exactly virtue signaling.
I think it means not for virtue signaling [about musk/twitter].
Avoiding brand damage and other “common” virtue signaling (like sticking American flags on things for July 4th, sticking rainbows on things for pride, etc) are just called “marketing”. It’s standard operating procedure for someone looking to make money.
My political brand image is not important to my product, and could only hurt me.
That said, I am more fortunate in the space I am in (no competitors, clear utility).
(edit: I agree that he may have been referring to virtue signaling about Musk specifically, hard to say.)
I think this is supposed to be in contrast to the ubiquitous posts about “I can’t trust twitter because Elon is a bad man that’s why I’m cutting my ad spend”
I don't care what political party death threats are directed at, I don't want my ad displayed next to a death threat. It's not a moral objection, it's a business decision.
Case in point: Any news company. 95% of their content is about objectionable actions taken by objectionable people. But ad money rolls in despite being placed next to crime, rape, murder, racism, war, and yes, even death threats. They’re literally monetizing crime.
Being advertised next to something is not necessarily an endorsement of that thing. They’re orthogonal
Your case in point... advertisers regularly try to get news companies to not run certain stories. Advertisers are rarely successful, but it does happen!
https://www.jstor.org/stable/20460787
Advertisers have a lot more say about the morals we have in modern times than you think.
"female presenting nipples"
Your initial assertion doesn't hold either. For example you can advertise through TrafficJunky way cheaper than on social media. Yet most companies don't.
But the assertion was the advertisers don’t want to be next to crime, racism, etc.
I’m just giving a simple example that, largely, it is not true. You can be next to unsavory things and still get tons of ads, if you do it right.
You're probably not running national or global ad campaigns.
"Adult" posts means __pornography__.
I don't think pornography is necessarily virtue signaling. We all understand that some brands don't want to associate with it though.
I don't think "Antiemetic" is necessarily political. But if it is to you, then... focus on the other word in that sentence. I've heard that more-and-more pornographic material has been appearing on Twitter recently (even before the Elon takeover), and people / advertisers were feeling more and more uncomfortable about it.
... Eh? Someone should go back in time and tell DoubleClick and Google that they didn't need all those content rules for their ad networks. Traditional web ad platforms have _never_ allowed their ads to be placed amongst "hardcore antisemitism and adult spam".
On the
> user’s own subscribers
point... Have you used Twitter in the last decade? What you see on Twitter isn't who you subscribe to, it is what the vaunted algorithm chooses to foist on you, with a little bit of who you actually subscribe to as a treat.
Did Twitter get rid of a bunch of bots? This is the fakest thing about this post.
Immediately proceeds to make it about virtue signaling 2 steps below.
Addendum: HN downvotes are the sweetest tears because you can tell who is crying.
When I very first learned about Twitter, I honestly thought the entire thing was a joke that was always a month away from revealing itself. That feeling has remained startlingly consistent over the last 16 years. I just expect Jack Dorsey to pop around the corner and be like "Haha you silly gooses, here's our real product that we have actually been working on!"
Banks and brokerages spend billions on advertising...
For me, this article helped in understanding why advertisers would exit Twitter. I was wondering about that. It delivered.
Why should you? Not everything has to be about outrage.
I think it's interesting to see how a major tech company falls apart when 80+% of staff abruptly leave. Breaking logins for paying customers and ignoring issues they raise seems like a notable issue.