The group, Global Alliance for Responsible Media, also known as GARM, is a voluntary ad-industry initiative run by the World Federation of Advertisers that aims to help brands avoid having their advertisements appear alongside illegal or harmful content. GARM confirmed it is still planning to defend itself in court.

The end of GARM marks a temporary victory for Musk and X CEO Linda Yaccarino, even though a judge hasn’t made a ruling yet.

  • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    And Musk has even managed to do a couple of worthwhile things in his life as well. I don’t see why that means I should disregard every other terrible thing he has done, and will do.

    Because that is your argument. That these gigantic advertising entities, who would destroy the world if it meant an extra 0.5% in their net revenue, are doing the world of service and we should be grateful for it.

    I am not, fuck them. I hope all their key decision makers and Musk gather for settlement talks, and a meteor strikes square in the middle of the conference table.

    • klugerama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Ok, fuck them. But shutting down this nonprofit organization doesn’t directly affect their bottom line. It may eventually have an indirect effect.

      My point is that by shutting down, the only obvious direct effect is that advertisements are now more likely to appear adjacent to bullshit hate propaganda. This doesn’t substantially hurt the advertisers in a large way - it hurts people more because it elevates the visibility of hate speech. Why would you think that’s good? This does absolutely fuck all to stop advertising or advertisers.

    • xantoxis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      No, you don’t understand.

      The advertising entities, who definitely suck ass, would be MUCH WORSE and so would EVERYTHING ELSE if there wasn’t someone telling them “don’t put ads next to nazis”. It’s called harm reduction dude.

      • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        No, I understand.

        Do you really think that if it wasn’t for their consortium, companies would think “you know what? I think we should run ads next to Nazis”.

        Hint: No. They wouldn’t.

        • FatCrab@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          But they would end up running ads next to them more often. There are a lot of shitty industry groups. This is like the most banal, inoffensive one to get shitty about.

          • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I really think you’re missing the point here.

            CNN is running a headline intentionally distorting the reality of what this group is. They’re making it sound like Musk destroyed the Humane Society.

            They want people to feel pity for the world’s largest advertisers, or feel angry that Musk managed to slightly inconvenience them.

            If you want to have a debate on the merits, you can’t have it in an environment like that.

        • xantoxis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          So let me get this straight: you hate ad companies and want to cast them all into the fire (a position I agree with, fwiw);

          but you also think they are ethical enough and competent enough to self-police running against nazi shit.

          What