That isn’t accurate - you can look up the details before getting all fussy. Of all the twitter users they were the only user that saw one pairing and one of the other pairings may have been seen by one actual user, but also might’ve just been MM seeing it twice.
It wasn’t an organic thing and it’ll be interesting to see if it goes to court.
It wasn’t an organic thing and it’ll be interesting to see if it goes to court.
it was completely organic. no outside-twitter resources were used to achieve the result - they literally used twitter’s tools and proved it could happen readily. That’s all advertisers need to see to bug the fuck out.
You don’t have to modify a lawn mower to flip it upside down and throw cats in it my friend.
no you just have to be a psychopath to suggest it.
did they break twitter, inject code, falsify user records, hack anything? No.
They used the service as it’s intended - picked some people and brands to follow then refreshed their feed. Buddy, that’s as organic as manure - and even if it somehow was gamed, dozens of other instances of hate shit being positioned aside brands THAT RIGHTFULLY DON’T WANT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH HATE SHIT have been posted - it’s not just media matters.
it’s not just the ADL’s criticism.
GET IT THROUGH YOUR FUCKING MELON - Musk’s the problem. Your refusal to see the obvious is sad.
no you just have to be a psychopath to suggest it.
Ah. Miss the point and make a stupid medical diagnosis? Not the best start. I’ll get back to this.
They used the service as it’s intended - picked some people and brands to follow then refreshed their feed.
If it’s organic why did nobody else see the combo? They literally behaved in a way no other user has, and it was contrived to find edge cases in the ad service. It’s not organic use.
We’re talking about facts and definitions. There’s no reason for you to be this worked up, angry or vile to other people.
Ah. Miss the point and make a stupid medical diagnosis? Not the best start. I’ll get back to this.
yeah suggesting murdering animals as a method to defend free speech was you’re weird tactic mate, not mine.
So you’re suggesting without the ‘contrived’ method of selecting people to follow, which is part of twitter’s core features, that no one would see these issues?
You literally don’t know what you’re talking about or are being intentionally disingenous - it’s gross and sad. Fuck off with your bullshit, you defend nazis and their proponents - what the fuck is wrong with you?
And how dare you criticize anyone for getting worked up about your nazi apologist bullshit, you suggested mowing cats, sicko.
Even Twitter isn’t claiming that Media Matters somehow broke their algorithm (unsurprisingly, since that makes Twitter look terrible):
The lawsuit filed Monday accuses Media Matters of publishing a report that distorted the likelihood of ads appearing beside extremist content on X, a move the social media company says led major and influential advertisers to suspend their campaigns en masse. The company alleges that the group’s testing methodology was not representative of how real users experience the site and calls for a judge to force Media Matters to take down the analysis.
The case appears to be a “bogus” attempt to chill criticism in a way that “flatly contradicts basic First Amendment principles,” Ted Boutrous, a First Amendment attorney with years of experience dealing with the tech industry, told CNN. Boutrous added that the case could backfire for X in the discovery phase, as Media Matters could demand internal information that, if presented at trial, could prove embarrassing or highly damaging to the social media company.
The lawsuit also contains “fatal flaws” by conceding that ads did, in fact, appear beside extremist content, regardless of how Media Matters achieved that result, according to Steve Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas and a CNN contributor.
“The complaint admits that the thing Media Matters was making a big deal about actually happened,” Vladeck said. “Most companies wouldn’t want their ads running next to neo-Nazi content even once, and wouldn’t care about the exact percentage of users who were encountering such side-by-side placement.”
Contrary to the complaint, Media Matters “never claimed that what it found was typical of other users’ experience,” Vladeck added.
They contrived a situation that literally happened to nobody else. You’ll have to excuse my liberty with the word broken, but this is a non-issue.
If it wasn’t musk none of us would give a fuck. If a right wing propaganda mill did the same thing everyone would happily admit it’s misleading. The fact that it gets any traction at all is so fucking depressing.
I’m aware of that. However, Twitter’s own records are the sole source of this information. If they managed to falsify it without text messages or emails, how would the court find that out? How could anyone verify whether the records are complete and accurate in the first place?
That’s up to the defense to work out. It would be pretty difficult to completely falsify the interactions that led to it, but that’s way worse than what they’re suing over.
His claim for suing Media Matters is that ads don’t always appear next to Neo-Nazis, therefore they had to hit refresh until one did.
Which… they never said otherwise? And that doesn’t really change things?
right? they’ve illustrated it happens. Advertisers don’t want to be shown with nazi content, elon’s hosting nazi content, it’s really that simple.
No, it’s that they didn’t for anyone organically. Media Matters essentially broke their advertising algo and pretended anyone else saw them.
Nonsense. All they did was hit refresh. Anyone can do it.
They followed specific people and topics (neonazis and major brands) to bring it about. Seems fine to me.
That isn’t accurate - you can look up the details before getting all fussy. Of all the twitter users they were the only user that saw one pairing and one of the other pairings may have been seen by one actual user, but also might’ve just been MM seeing it twice.
It wasn’t an organic thing and it’ll be interesting to see if it goes to court.
it was completely organic. no outside-twitter resources were used to achieve the result - they literally used twitter’s tools and proved it could happen readily. That’s all advertisers need to see to bug the fuck out.
We have different definitions of organic. I think the fact that only they saw some of the pairings shows it’s something no legitimate user did.
You don’t have to modify a lawn mower to flip it upside down and throw cats in it my friend.
no you just have to be a psychopath to suggest it.
did they break twitter, inject code, falsify user records, hack anything? No.
They used the service as it’s intended - picked some people and brands to follow then refreshed their feed. Buddy, that’s as organic as manure - and even if it somehow was gamed, dozens of other instances of hate shit being positioned aside brands THAT RIGHTFULLY DON’T WANT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH HATE SHIT have been posted - it’s not just media matters.
it’s not just the ADL’s criticism.
GET IT THROUGH YOUR FUCKING MELON - Musk’s the problem. Your refusal to see the obvious is sad.
Ah. Miss the point and make a stupid medical diagnosis? Not the best start. I’ll get back to this.
If it’s organic why did nobody else see the combo? They literally behaved in a way no other user has, and it was contrived to find edge cases in the ad service. It’s not organic use.
We’re talking about facts and definitions. There’s no reason for you to be this worked up, angry or vile to other people.
yeah suggesting murdering animals as a method to defend free speech was you’re weird tactic mate, not mine.
So you’re suggesting without the ‘contrived’ method of selecting people to follow, which is part of twitter’s core features, that no one would see these issues?
Because that’s a lie. It’s happened to hundreds of users. And seeing awful shit on twitter is getting more regular because of Musk’s idiotic reversal on content moderation. https://time.com/6295711/twitters-hate-content-advertisers/
You literally don’t know what you’re talking about or are being intentionally disingenous - it’s gross and sad. Fuck off with your bullshit, you defend nazis and their proponents - what the fuck is wrong with you?
And how dare you criticize anyone for getting worked up about your nazi apologist bullshit, you suggested mowing cats, sicko.
If your lawnmower is faulty and you find out after a couple of uses, I don’t claim it only counts if the lawnmower was used by each person once.
When nobody has a problem with your millions of mowers except one guy, we usually ask what’s wrong with the guy rather than the mower.
Even Twitter isn’t claiming that Media Matters somehow broke their algorithm (unsurprisingly, since that makes Twitter look terrible):
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/21/tech/elon-musk-texas-lawsuit-media-matters/index.html
They contrived a situation that literally happened to nobody else. You’ll have to excuse my liberty with the word broken, but this is a non-issue.
If it wasn’t musk none of us would give a fuck. If a right wing propaganda mill did the same thing everyone would happily admit it’s misleading. The fact that it gets any traction at all is so fucking depressing.
how much does Musk compensate you for all this mate?
Musk and Yaccarino claim hat it wasn’t displayed that way to any regular users. We have no way of verifying that.
You can read my other comments. They filed a lawsuit referring to their analytics. If it’s a lie it will come out in discovery.
I’m aware of that. However, Twitter’s own records are the sole source of this information. If they managed to falsify it without text messages or emails, how would the court find that out? How could anyone verify whether the records are complete and accurate in the first place?
That’s up to the defense to work out. It would be pretty difficult to completely falsify the interactions that led to it, but that’s way worse than what they’re suing over.
How’s Elon’s boot taste?
I don’t like being lied to, even if the lie fits my worldview.