Elon Musk, the owner of X, criticized advertisers with expletives on Wednesday at The New York Times’s DealBook Summit.

  • Christer Enfors@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    113
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    I thought this guy was supposed to be right wing? Doesn’t he like the free market? Because, I mean, the alternative is regulation. We could make antisemitism illegal, but in the west we have largely decided that we will instead rely on free market forces (read: public shaming) to root that shit out.

    It’s almost as if… and this might sound crazy, but hear me out… it’s almost as if this guy wants the advantages of capitalism, but none of its disadvantages?

    • Diplomjodler@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      He’s a libertarian. That means he thinks he can do whatever the fuck he wants but will squeal like a stuck pig at the slightest sign of pushback.

      • ours@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        41
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        And as any “proper” libertarian, he depends deeply on State money (SpaceX + Tesla).

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Everyone loves capitalisim until it’s inflicted on them. Oddly enough, this includes Musk.

      • Djad2410@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        96
        ·
        7 months ago

        What advertisers are doing isn’t capitalism it’s collusion to manipulate the market.

          • Djad2410@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            89
            ·
            7 months ago

            Obviously you don’t understand capitalism and your just going off what people who want communism and socialism are saying.

            • cheesepotatoes@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              49
              ·
              7 months ago

              Please explain to me how advertisers exercising their agency in choosing who to advertise with is “communism” or “socialism”.

              • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                58
                ·
                7 months ago

                When I mentioned communism and socialism I was pointing to the mischaracterization of capitalism. Capitalism is just the free and open market and when companies collude together to manipulate the market that’s not capitalism. Capitalism has built in rules against market manipulation and monopolies unfortunately that requires the government to do it’s job to enforce it, which it’s been doing a piss poor job of.

                • SPRUNT@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  27
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  What evidence is there that the companies are colluding? Are there communication logs where they all conversed and decided to pull ads? Is there any evidence at all that the companies had any interaction with each other about this and made a unifying decision to cancel their ads?

                  Collusion requires entities to work together to achieve a mutual goal. Otherwise, it’s just a coincidence of timing.

                  • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    30
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    At the moment it’s speculation, but from past events involving these same companies we’ve witnessed collusion.

                • SCB@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  29
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Capitalism has built in rules against market manipulation and monopolies

                  It most assuredly does not. Addressing these externalities is the responsibility of government.

                  • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    26
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    The fact that it requires a free and open market are the rules and since it’s a component of the government the government has to make sure the system is free and open.

                  • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    23
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    No, some level of punishment of those that try to manipulate/manopolize the market.

                • Fedizen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  I think you might be having difficulty grasping the idea that people have marketing budgets and if say the ceo of a company you advertise on very publicly endorses hate speech it does create a brand management problem.

                  You want your products to not be associated with things like, say, racism, which are kind of “yucky” to a lot of people.

                  As a result you might refocus spending. If a bunch of people do this at once this doesn’t mean there’s collusion. For example, during a thunderstorm you might see less people outside. This isn’t because they all colluding - people don’t like being struck by lightning. Similarly, companies don’t want their brands to be “yucky” to the average consumer and often its just a matter of moving the ad spending to another platform without the baggage.

                  You could ONLY limit this effect by banning advertising entirely.

                  • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    Yes you’re right about public image and a company wanting to preserve it. And I might be a little hyperbolic about what I’m saying. But really if it was just public image along with their ads, they would delete/(stop using) all of their accounts to show that they didn’t want anything to do with Twitter as long as they had hateful content on there.

              • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                17
                ·
                7 months ago

                I’m not conflating the two I’m simply saying the people that have an issue or misunderstanding and capitalism usage fall in either camp.

            • SCB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              7 months ago

              I’m entirely pro-capitalism. Why should the free market not be allowed to act here?

              • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                29
                ·
                7 months ago

                In this context if they disagree so much they should just leave the platform and then it would fall under capitalism. What they want is to stay on the platform and dictate how it should be run and if they don’t get their way they make threats and ultimatums, which is a form of manipulation, I.e anti-capitalism.

                • SCB@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  21
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  It’s not manipulation to say “we’re leaving because you did this thing and won’t be back until you don’t do this thing.” This is simply the market forces articulating their preferences.

                  If I stop buying a company’s products because I disagree with the direction it’s going, I am voting with my wallet, not manipulating the company.

                  • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    20
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    Yes vote with your wallet and leave, but don’t bring up false information to try and get others to leave, don’t use subsidiary companies, you own to lie and badmouth, when you leaving didn’t change the companies stance.

              • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                21
                ·
                7 months ago

                Government regulations. Capitalism is a component of the government so it should take government action to enforce it.

                • frezik@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  11
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Really? Because I’ve been repeatedly told by libertarian types (not socialists or communists) that any government regulation is not capitalism.

                  You’re free to disagree with them, but then I’m going to ask what your definition of capitalism is that assumes this regulation (not just allowing it, but mandating it).

                  • SCB@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    . Because I’ve been repeatedly told by libertarian types (not socialists or communists) that any government regulation is not capitalism

                    Found your problem. That’s like asking flat earthers about gravity. They may think it exists but their concept of it is a fiction meant to align to their worldview.

                  • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    11
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    No matter the system you need some level of regulation otherwise it’s just anarchy. What you want is a balanced regulation that not overbearing and keeps thing running smoothly.

          • Djad2410@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            29
            ·
            7 months ago

            I simply made a claim to why something is happening whether or not is true is yet to be proven but that doesn’t mean it’s not a possibility. These companies want a hand in how the company is run and if they’re not getting what they want them calling each other up to coordinate an ads pull is a tool in their toolbox.

            • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              7 months ago

              Either bring facts, or state it as an opinion, don’t try to do both or you will get called out.

              • Djad2410@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                7 months ago

                It’s to early to state facts so it’s a given that most things mentioned this early would be opinions.