• billwashere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Can someone explain to me how you can sue over a business choosing to not spend their advertising dollars on a particular service? I mean Elon specifically told his customers to “fuck off” and now he’s suing them?!? I just don’t understand these petulant little man children being so litigious when they get their feefees hurt.

    • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      28 minutes ago

      Here’s the claim from the article:

      The complaint alleges that the WFA “organized an advertiser boycott of Twitter through GARM, with the goal of coercing Twitter to comply with the GARM Brand Safety Standards to the satisfaction of GARM.” And it claims that these efforts succeeded in harming Twitter/X, with “at least” 18 GARM-affiliated advertisers stopping their purchase of ads on Twitter between November and December 2022, and other advertisers “substantially” reducing their spending.

    • Star@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Instead of someone explaining, you could always read the article linked and see for yourself.

      • billwashere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 minutes ago

        I did read the article.

        For example how does this:

        In fact, the lawsuit claims that ad prices on X “remain well below those charged by X’s closest competitors in the social media advertising market,” so “by refraining from purchasing advertising from X, boycotting advertisers are forgoing a valuable opportunity to purchase low-priced advertising inventory on a platform with brand safety that meets or exceeds industry standards.”

        force someone or some company to spend their advertising dollars there. If a company spending ad money doesn’t like what the ad service represents, in this case Elon is a douchebag and we’ll just ignore the fact that he gave a Nazi salute at the inauguration, than they aren’t required to use them as a service, illegal boycott or not, which I don’t even believe is a thing.

        Here’s a hyperbolic argument. Let’s just say for example we have two grocery stores. One promotes pedophilia and the other does not. The pedo grocery store has prices that are let’s say half of what the other grocery store is, because I don’t know fucking kids makes you feel generous. A bunch of people get together and decide they don’t wanna shop at NAMBLAmart. Is NAMBLAmart allow to sue me because I didn’t shop there?

        Because unless I’m missing something, that’s pretty much the argument.

    • ehoff121@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The object of the lawsuit is to get these deep pocketed corporations to settle for millions. If the companies aren’t able to get the suits dismissed, they will settle. They don’t want to get on the wrong side of the current administration and it’s less costly than a years long legal battle.