IBM, Lionsgate, the European Union, and, reportedly, Apple, have all pulled advertising from X following Elon Musk’s apparent endorsement of an antisemitic conspiracy theory. Experts say it could soon get much worse.
I think there is a sense that if Apple is willing to walk away, it’s a signal to other companies that the problem is real.
I agree that Apple may be the canary in the coal mine but I propose a motive beyond ethics.
It may be that Apple has seen a reduction in traffic from ads on Twitter recently and this latest move by Musk, coupled with everything else, gave them leverage to get out of any contracted ad buys. They pull ineffective ads, help their brand and ethics image, and save money doing it.
The cynic in me says whatever the motivation the largest driver is financial.
I agree, and I may have muddled that in my response. I was more proposing an alternative to Apple’s “influencer” in ethics status being a driver for their departure, or for other companies.
Positing that ethics may be a factor but ultimately that Apple’s motivation is financial and other businesses understand that. They’ll see it as the tide turning to where Twitter advertising is going to start hurting brands this the halo effect.
The cynic in me says whatever the motivation the largest driver is financial.
Always is. “Ethics” is just a guide to survival as a society- corporate ethics is really just a guide to survival, too. Which is why so many corporations seem unethical to people… their guide to survival is “lie cheat and steal”… where people see that as problematic.
I agree that Apple may be the canary in the coal mine but I propose a motive beyond ethics.
It may be that Apple has seen a reduction in traffic from ads on Twitter recently and this latest move by Musk, coupled with everything else, gave them leverage to get out of any contracted ad buys. They pull ineffective ads, help their brand and ethics image, and save money doing it.
The cynic in me says whatever the motivation the largest driver is financial.
My reading of the “it’s not just about money” statement was, “it’s not just about losing Apple’s advertising spend”.
I agree, and I may have muddled that in my response. I was more proposing an alternative to Apple’s “influencer” in ethics status being a driver for their departure, or for other companies.
Positing that ethics may be a factor but ultimately that Apple’s motivation is financial and other businesses understand that. They’ll see it as the tide turning to where Twitter advertising is going to start hurting brands this the halo effect.
Always is. “Ethics” is just a guide to survival as a society- corporate ethics is really just a guide to survival, too. Which is why so many corporations seem unethical to people… their guide to survival is “lie cheat and steal”… where people see that as problematic.