142
submitted 11 months ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/technology@beehaw.org
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] communication@beehaw.org 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I agree with your point in general, but I have a hard time applying it here. Unless the lawsuit alleges that MM hacked into Twitter or doctored the screenshots, then the core claim of the MM report "Twitter served ad Y next to post Z" is not under dispute. If the claim is that refreshing a page is malicious, then I don't think we need to wait to call the lawsuit malicious.

[-] blaine@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago

@communication

I agree that the core claim of the MM report is not under dispute. But take a look at their article now that you know the context around how those ads were generated.

https://www.mediamatters.org/twitter/musk-endorses-antisemitic-conspiracy-theory-x-has-been-placing-ads-apple-bravo-ibm-oracle

I don't know if it's defamatory, but you have to agree that it comes off as a bit disingenuous based on the new info from X. Of course that info from X could be BS, which is why I said we'll have to wait for the court case to know for sure.

[-] whofearsthenight@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago

I mean, it's splitting hairs. While the proximity probably didn't help, I doubt the companies deciding to pull ads weren't like "sure, we don't mind hanging out in a nazi bar, just make sure not to seat us next to any nazis." I mean, some probably were, but there has been increasingly large amounts of pressure on these people and within like 24 hours of each other Elon endorses replacement theory and the MM story drops that Elon is running ads for nazis. There are only so many times you can make a dumb excuse. For lots of us, that was a long time ago. Even the capitalists are realizing now at least that he's bad for business.

[-] blaine@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

@whofearsthenight

No doubt - the advertisers are 100% right to pull out. I was only answering the original commenter that asked how the MM report could be considered defamatory. I definitely didn't intend to come across as a Musk apologist.

[-] communication@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago

Okay, that's a fair point. They left too many blanks for the reader to fill in, and some will assume the problem is more widespread than it is.

When I put my Social Scientist hat on, I don't think the methodology was totally unreasonable or obviously malicious, so X would have to strengthen their claims to convince me to wait for court. But you're right, MM should have done better.

this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2023
142 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37699 readers
273 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS