so the claim here is that it is illegal for private companies to collectively decide how to use their advertising dollars?
Reposted from
Jeff Kemp
Right on cue.
Comments
https://bsky.app/profile/pwnallthethings.bsky.social/post/3lbikvnxees2b
Paxton has been a useful tool all along.
He, like most MAGAs, doesn't give a squat about actually serving his constituents.
/sarcasm
New: You can't do that!!
If so, Fox going to be sued again.
I ran marketing budgets for years and it's about targeting and efficiency.
If I'm not fishing for conversions from nazis, I don't spend my money on nazi clicks. Simple.
I can choose to spend wherever the fuck I (or my client) wants to find a market.
It's a waste of money marketing charity and social causes in some places.
Like that Nazi hellhole X.
@jamellebouie.net is perfection.
And that’s a two-way street. X doesn’t have to let Nazis or the KKK advertise there. That’s their choice.
they all saw twitter at the same time and individually said “no fucking thank you”
or else!
“Your honour, as we know the plaintiff to be a plain-speaking man of integrity who would never bloviate to appear like a big tough man in front of the other billionaires, my client took him at his word when he said “Go fuck yourself.”
As do smart Republicans.
They just hide themselves well.
“ give me your money, or else”
Yes. That is the argument.
Just in recent history here, companies boycotting North Carolina helped turn the tide to overturn NC's anti-trans bathroom bill.
They want to scare folks away from using boycotts as a tactic in furtherance of social justice.
Not surprising = not free speech (?)
The future = we can only speak through ads and MUST speak
so much for, well, fiduciary and corporate responsibility --- the First A doesn't mandate that everyone with ad $$$ has to be aired (or put in a newpaper / blog site, etc)
Granted, that was about truth in advertising laws and criminalizing fraud, but I think those are okay now, so advertising money is a positive right???
Letting private companies choose to not advertise on a Nazi platform? Antitrust.
Honestly, IDK what is hard to understand here.
Also Republicans: That company did something I really hate so we have to prosecute them for running their business the way they want to.
Okay? Weren't these guys the small-gov't, pro-business people a minute ago?
🦅🇺🇸🎇🦅
I keep hoping that someday there will be a comeuppance. But here we are with Paxton doing some deep state trash for his sponsors.
“It ain't supposed to be good! It's supposed to be bought.”
—The Untouchables
He would be worse than Gaetz.
Well, I don’t know anymore.
I don’t understand what is happening.
I don’t think our justice system should move so slow for four years and yet so fast to dismiss charges or pending cases.
The government choosing which corporations shall prosper, and which shall not, is capitalism.
And that am way it isn't. You am tune in yesterday for more Htrae news.
- A significant number of the companies involved
- Deliberately coordinated pulling their ads from Twitter
- Specifically to destroy the company
- In a way that worked
Conspiracy is infamously hard to prove.
But it was a group of companies acting collectively not individually, which seems to be what the case hangs on?
But that's not what happened, it just became toxic to the brands to advertise on the Nazi site. No backroom deals needed.
But the obvious explanation is that they independently decided that advertising next to Nazi posts would be harmful to their business.
The problem is that advertising on Twitter is a net negative for big brands, independent of industry.
Again, not what happened.
If Bluesky had ads and a bunch of PaTriOT companies boycotted ad-spend on it, they'd be clapping like seals and shrieking "Free speech!"
https://apnews.com/article/paxton-indictment-texas-d5e57fc6cd062c995ced91e9d2542199
It could have happened that way by each company just deciding "maybe let's not advertise next to this awful shit"