hahahahah i’d like to see that nazi fuck try, see him wade through discovery, the ADL was built for this shit, it’s their very reason for being
The thing is the added complexity that the plaintiff is adding is just going to extend out the entire process. The filing indicates something like a 60% loss of ad revenue. Even if the case runs smooth as butter, there’s no way Musk can get access to the money he’s seeking in time to cover the massive loss plus the huge debt obligations he’s sacked the company with already.
There’s zero ways restitution from this case would ever give the company enough head above water quick enough to prevent drowning in debt.
Elon Musk said Monday that X, formerly known as Twitter, has “no choice” but to file a defamation lawsuit against the Anti-Defamation League amid an ongoing slump in advertising revenue.
“Based on what we’ve heard from advertisers, ADL seems to be responsible for most of our revenue loss,” Musk wrote on Monday. “Giving them maximum benefit of the doubt, I don’t see any scenario where they’re responsible for less than 10% of the value destruction, so ~$4 billion.”
How to avoid being antisemitic, step one: Don’t blame your incompetence and piss poor judgement on “the Jews.”
Elon Musk: D’oh!
So - Twitter has lost $40 billion in advertising revenue?
Sounds about right. Wonder how much more they can lose.
I’m no accountant, but I have to imagine when he’s talking about “value” it’s not exact loss of sales, but something more like “projected sales for the next 10 years” or something.
There’s no way Twitter, a company that was overvalued at $43 billion, was also making $40billion a year in advertising sales.
He seems to be saying that the market value of Twitter is $40B less than what it was before stuff happened. “Value destruction” tends to be applied to “stock” (like market cap) rather than “flow” (like revenues).
He’s basically saying Twitter is worth $4B, given that he paid $44B and seems to be saying $40B of values was destroyed.
Losing $40B in less than a year is, uh, remarkable.
For context, this all started Thursday when the ADL xeeted that is had a “frank and productive” conversation with X’s CEO. She replied with some warm and fuzzy PR bullshit about working together to improve the platform blah blah blah. But the right wing nutjobs weren’t happy with the implication that X was in anyway cooperating with the ADL and there was immediate backlash. “Ban the ADL” became a trending hashtag, because, according to the racist majority on X, the ADL is the actual hate group and they pressure advertisers who in turn pressure platforms to “ban free speech.” Musk, always quick to undermine the sad sack holding the title “CEO” jumped on that bandwagon and been xeeting about it all weekend, threatening to ban them, generally talking trash, and now threatening to sue.
I find it depressing that I’m aware of all this.
they pressure advertisers who in turn pressure platforms to “ban free speech.”
This argument of theirs is so strange. Don’t advertisers too have free speech? Is the right wing arguing that advertisers shouldn’t be allowed to choose to stop advertising with Twitter? What “pressure” can ADL put on them? Does the ADL have legal authority to force advertisers to exit Twitter? No. Is the ADL holding private information about the CEOs of advertisers and extorting the advertisers to leave? Not likely.
Is the ADL communicating a position that the majority of the advertiser’s customers find the racist, fascist, and misogynistic content now omnipresent on Twitter distasteful, and therefore harmful to the advertisers’ brands and with negative impacts to future sales? Likely yes, but those statements are themselves free speech on the part of the ADL.
What the right wing seems to be arguing is that the definition of free speech should be the right to say whatever racist, fascist, and misogynistic comments they like without anyone making choices of their own to dissociate with the right wing. That’s not free speech that’s…fascism!
Perhaps ironically it is the ADLs free speech that allows them to show advertisers what is posted on elons website. Further irony can be found in the fact that a screenshot of elsons website showing bigoted posts is an example of fact and not of feelings. Moreover: crying about your lost ad revenue is feelings and blaming the ADL for it is not facts.
Don’t advertisers too have free speech?
I remember around 2020, a lot of freethinkers began spouting something about how Twitter is “a platform not a publisher” and therefore users are entitled to treat the website like a public meeting place and protected by first amendment rights, etc.
It was basically a Soverign Citizen argument about how Section 230 means websites don’t have the authority to moderate content at all, and it died down after Trump stopped preaching it after he launched Truth
Some articles about the notion:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/no-section-230-does-not-require-platforms-be-neutral
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/12/publisher-or-platform-it-doesnt-matter
I remember around 2020, a lot of freethinkers began spouting something about how Twitter is “a platform not a publisher” and therefore users are entitled to treat the website like a public meeting place and protected by first amendment rights, etc.
I think you’re taking that quote of mine with an unintended meaning. I didn’t mean to suggest advertisers have right to post what they want, rather they have the choice to NOT post if they don’t want to. The right-wing argument appears to suggest that advertisers should be powerless to choose or not choose to advertise. Suggesting they are wheat to be harvested. A resource owned by the company they are purchasing advertising from; its a bizarre notion.
It’s never ok to hurt somebody’s business just because you disagree with them giving free speech to everybody. The ADL should pay Elon for the damage they did to his business
Why not? It’s free speech if I denounce a business for their positions, is it not?
Or are you saying you disagree with free speech?
I almost feel bad for the new “CEO”. It really seems like she’s doing her best to give the impression that Twitter is still a sane company with reasonable business practices, only for Elon to completely disregard her messaging and do the exact opposite.
I would feel bad if it wasn’t obvious that Musk would do this. It is impossible for him to control himself. He can’t help to put his dumbass opinion in the mix, no matter how much it hurts him personally and professionally. It’s the reason he was forced to buy Twitter in the first place.
Drop me in her seat for 7 figures with a nice kick-out clause (no stock, please) and I’ll pretend Xitter is a wholesome, thoughtful, productive corporate citizen, too.
It’s a shitty position to be in so I almost feel bad as well, except literally everyone knew this was going to happen when she joined. But I doubt she thought, “What’s the worst that could happen? I have a bland conversation with the ADL, and Musk spends the weekend retweeting self deacribed antisemites and threatening to ban/sue the ADL?”
She is scheduled to be at the Code Conference hosted by the Verge/Vox at the end of September. I’m really interested in how she answers when asked about being undermined, especially now that the undermining has taken the form of her boss just being an outright antisemite.
Shut up Elon, you unfuckable, racist, dork.
Pretty sure all his kids were IVF, so he may in fact be technically unfuckable.
One of the oldest most experienced groups at litigation against hate and defamation will have a field day with this. I would not be surprised to see X owing the ADL damages if Musk actually follows through.
This is as nearsighted as DeSantis starting legal battle with Disney.
