Apple Resumes Advertising on X
daringfireball.net
daringfireball.net
(41 points, 23 hours ago, 48 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43032112
Judging by the quality of comments here and in the linked submissions, it's a good thing.
* By "bad" I mean bad for HN: low-substance, flamey, high-indignation, high-snark. Not what this site is for.
2024 X $2.7 billion revenue $1.25 billion EBITDA
Last week Alwaleed bin Talal a longtime Twitter and X investor said his holdings have held value after the acquisition and he considers it in the process of doubling. Some banks also reported selling their debt in 2024 for 97 cents on the dollar.
Interview: https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1887210068485009599
https://www.semafor.com/article/02/07/2025/musks-x-doubled-i...
He went through a lot of stress thought being leveraged in the stock market crash.
There, I fixed the headlines for you.
That seems to be the truth.
Explain? Because if it was politically dangerous, it automatically means it wasn’t profitable.
Advertising was dangerous because there was a perception that the previous US government would politically prosecute anyone who opposed them. Companies advertising on X, and hence supporting opposition such as Musk, would fall into this category.
Seriously though, I certainly don’t want my companies to have political ideologies. Follow the law, be good to customers and serve everyone.
The TikTok law was meant to force divesture to a US company. The Supreme Court ruled on the legality of it at the very last minute, so there is broad bipartisan support for more time to find an acquirer, including Biden saying he won't enforce it on the last day in office.
They know a lot of Americans depend on it for livelihood and entertainment.
> They know a lot of Americans depend on it for livelihood and entertainment.
Yes because President Musk has showed real concerns about putting people out of work
The only reason they left was politics.
By which metric? Even Elon has admitted they're not making money.
Revenue is down with the advertisers leaving but costs are down so much, I think it’s recently profitable or will be soon? And with advertising coming back on top of the new cost structure, it should be a cash cow.
No that's not what Elon said and the tweet he was replying to is a nobody with zero data.
[0] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-musk-antisemitic-comments-...
Of course companies put money before political ideology, as a public company, it can be considered an obligation to their shareholders. The part that matters is that their customers may have political ideologies, and it is important for a company to match the ideologies of the customers who make them the most money, at least in appearance.
Not sure where this would fit into the law though something like this would certainly curtail cancel culture like activity.
Could a be a “facts and circumstances” type of legislation similar to the IRS. Many IRS rules go back to the “facts and circumstances” of a particular case to evaluate all the nuances relating to it.
What "facts and circumstances" are we interested in? Your original post mentioned ending business relationships due to political stances. Did you mean the political stance of the advertisers, the platform hosting ads, some third party or parties, a combination of the above, or something I've missed?
Look up “no duty to deal”.
Twitter does, though.
Even on HN, the comments on the previous threads, and already in this thread too, are getting downvoted and flagged (mine will soon follow, I’m sure).
Politics is an internet trigger. It can draw out the worst in even the most otherwise civil people.
They definitely can be. Usually, moderators dont want to deal with the shit slinging that comes with them though, and many intelligent people are too sensitive to allow bigotry and hateful comments to be allowed to be hosted.
I miss the old days where anything goes, and if you don't like it just close the browser. Better than censorship and sanitization.
Economic war is coming between the EU and US companies once Trump imposes tariffs.
And Apple needs Trump and Musk as allies rather than enemies.
Is this satire? I honestly can’t tell.
Two previous discussions were flagged as well:
[1] Apple Resumes Advertising on X | 44 points by greyadept 23 hours ago | 49 comments | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43032112
[2] Apple is once again advertising on X, more than a year after stopping all ads | 76 points by ksec 1 day ago | 38 comments | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43031493
Be sure to include your reasoning for what is wrong with or unfair about the tag and why the story warrants special treatment.
The truly worst websites are usually only found with a .tor browser. If Apple started advertising on Stormfront I'll get concerned, but right now X has fantastic discussion for ML devs and shows me stuff like this: https://x.com/Brittymigs/status/1889708756851634439
Opponents probably aren't using the site. Or have a fervor for something else and misdirecting it towards X.
Not allowed to have an alternate opinion anymore hey ?
It's interesting to me how the whole MAGA / Elon absolute "free speech" has now become the opposite of what it started out to be in favor of :)
Am I betting on a red 2028? If people like you keep at it, I will.
Be better.