No, it’s that they didn’t for anyone organically. Media Matters essentially broke their advertising algo and pretended anyone else saw them.
Comment on I bet Rockstar is thinking twice about *checks notes* making a normal looking female character.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months agoHis 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?
PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Nonsense. All they did was hit refresh. Anyone can do it.
squiblet@kbin.social 6 months ago
They followed specific people and topics (neonazis and major brands) to bring it about. Seems fine to me:
PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
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.
vivadanang@lemm.ee 6 months ago
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.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
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.
squiblet@kbin.social 6 months ago
Musk and Yaccarino claim hat it wasn’t displayed that way to any regular users. We have no way of verifying that.
Fuckfuckmyfuckingass@lemmy.world 6 months ago
How’s Elon’s boot taste?
PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
I don’t like being lied to, even if the lie fits my worldview.
vivadanang@lemm.ee 6 months ago
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.