News Walt Disney World and other major Disney accounts stop posting on social media platform X

[Model3 McQueen]

Yes but it didn't really help.



Your vehicle may qualify if the same defect can’t be fixed after four repair attempts within either:

• 1 year after your purchase
• 15,000 miles.

I don't know the full details, but my grandmother had a mercedes sedan that was constantly having weird electrical issues. She raised hell about it til the dealership upgraded her to a better model for free. Maybe you can convince the manager at the dealership to replace your car? I imagine they don't appreciate replacing the transmission so many times.

 

[mkt]

I don't know the full details, but my grandmother had a mercedes sedan that was constantly having weird electrical issues. She raised hell about it til the dealership upgraded her to a better model for free. Maybe you can convince the manager at the dealership to replace your car? I imagine they don't appreciate replacing the transmission so many times.

That’s extremely unlikely, especially for a mass market brand. Also, they get to bill Kia for parts and labor for the transmissions, so they’re making money.

 

[Model3 McQueen]

That’s extremely unlikely, especially for a mass market brand. Also, they get to bill Kia for parts and labor for the transmissions, so they’re making money.

You're right it's unlikely, but there's always that off chance. 3 transmissions within that many miles is incredibly bad luck.

 

[FutureCEO]

I don't know the full details, but my grandmother had a mercedes sedan that was constantly having weird electrical issues. She raised hell about it til the dealership upgraded her to a better model for free. Maybe you can convince the manager at the dealership to replace your car? I imagine they don't appreciate replacing the transmission so many times.

I did complain to Kia and got a whopping $300. My car is already four so I don't plan on keeping it for as long as I had the Honda. That lasted me 10 years - 150K miles.

 

[Brian]

Interesting the nobody has yet brought up why Musk is out for blood.

Musk is pointing out that Disney has not suspended advertising on Meta platforms (Facebook & Instagram) in light of recent allegations (and a lawsuit from the AG of New Mexico) of permitting content that "enables child s*x trafficking and assault"

Musk Slams Disney CEO Bob Iger—Again—After Disney Suspends Ads On X

Billionaire Elon Musk asked why Disney does not suspend its advertisements on Meta or Instagram, one week after Musk accused advertisers who fled X of “blackmailing” him with money.

www.forbes.com

 

[el_super]

Musk is pointing out that Disney has not suspended advertising on Meta platforms (Facebook & Instagram) in light of recent allegations (and a lawsuit from the AG of New Mexico) of permitting content that "enables child s*x trafficking and assault"

There are problems with all social media sites/platforms. Are Facebook and Instagram working to resolve them though?

Maybe it would help bring advertisers back if Musk actually calmly and professionally explained all the content moderation and review processes he is implementing and his plan for combating objectionable material on his platform. Even working toward a solution, knowing a 100% success rate is impossible, would show seriousness in combating these issues and making the platform better.

Instead... he posts memes.

He doesn't know how to run a company.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Interesting the nobody has yet brought up why Musk is out for blood.

Musk is pointing out that Disney has not suspended advertising on Meta platforms (Facebook & Instagram) in light of recent allegations (and a lawsuit from the AG of New Mexico) of permitting content that "enables child s*x trafficking and assault"

Musk Slams Disney CEO Bob Iger—Again—After Disney Suspends Ads On X

Billionaire Elon Musk asked why Disney does not suspend its advertisements on Meta or Instagram, one week after Musk accused advertisers who fled X of “blackmailing” him with money.

www.forbes.com

So does X and Musk’s changes has allowed it to flourish. Musk even personally intervened to unban a user who posted CSAM.

 

[Stripes]

Interesting the nobody has yet brought up why Musk is out for blood.

Musk is pointing out that Disney has not suspended advertising on Meta platforms (Facebook & Instagram) in light of recent allegations (and a lawsuit from the AG of New Mexico) of permitting content that "enables child s*x trafficking and assault"

Musk Slams Disney CEO Bob Iger—Again—After Disney Suspends Ads On X

Billionaire Elon Musk asked why Disney does not suspend its advertisements on Meta or Instagram, one week after Musk accused advertisers who fled X of “blackmailing” him with money.

www.forbes.com

As others have already posted, X not only has a problem with extremist content, they also have the same illegal content problem that other platforms have. Was Disney endorsing this content when they were advertising on Twitter as well? Elon should clean up his own yard before pointing fingers at his neighbors.

Earlier this year, researchers at the Stanford Internet Observatory found that Twitter failed to take down dozens of images of child sex abuse. The team identified 128 Twitter accounts selling child sex abuse material and 43 instances of known CSAM. “It is very surprising for any known CSAM to publicly appear on major social media platforms,” said lead author and chief technologist David Thiel. Twitter responded to the issue after being contacted by researchers. This year Twitter removed 525% more accounts related to child sexual exploitation content than a year ago, according to the company.

Twitter has been slow to catch and remove some harmful content since Musk fired or faced resignations for nearly 75% of Twitter’s staff, including the bulk of the trust and safety team, which is responsible for managing responses to content reports. On average, only 28% of antisemitic tweets reported by the ADL between December and January were removed or sanctioned. The group found the posts by drawing a 1% sample of all posts from Twitter’s API, or application programming interface. Twitter has since restricted the reported tweets that were found to violate policies, the company said.

“Since Elon Musk took over Twitter, we have seen the platform go from having one of the best trust and safety divisions in the industry, to one of the worst,” said Nadim Nashif, director at the Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media.

 

[Surferboy567]

That would require him to possess a level of mental competence that his idiot sycophantic fanbase have deluded themselves into believing he has. Musk is not simply immature and unhinged, he's also too stupid to run such a website.

There was a time that I believed it myself. Ever since he has ran Twitter into the ground my opinions have changed. Should of seen the red flags sooner.

 

[Brian]

I think it's worth pointing out the hypocrisy of pulling ads from X, allegedly due to the content that's shared there, while continuing to advertise on platforms where similarly abhorrent content is shared. Earlier on in this thread, TikTok was shared as an example, and now Meta platforms.

That's why I don't think it's about the content of the platforms, it's about Elon personally, and what he has said and done.

 

[J4546]

i think its a bit of both perhaps. Elon has become a cringe lord and says stupid stuff, but also advertising on twitter seems to be a waste of money for anyone.

 

[Stripes]

That's why I don't think it's about the content of the platforms, it's about Elon personally, and what he has said and done.

It is about Elon and what he has said. None of these companies want to be associated with him anymore.

Iger publicly admitted as much but Elon wants to distract from that so that he can be viewed as some kind of martyr.

 

[Brian]

It is about Elon and what he has said. None of these companies want to be associated with him anymore.

Iger publicly admitted as much but Elon wants to distract from that.

Right, and while these companies are free to spend their money as they please, I personally think that's a crappy reason to pull advertising from the platform. It should be based on whether or not they see a good return on their investment, not whether they like the owner and the things he says on his personal account.

 

[denyuntilcaught]

I think it's worth pointing out the hypocrisy of pulling ads from X, allegedly due to the content that's shared there, while continuing to advertise on platforms where similarly abhorrent content is shared. Earlier on in this thread, TikTok was shared as an example, and now Meta platforms.

That's why I don't think it's about the content of the platforms, it's about Elon personally, and what he has said and done.

Exactly. There's also a nuance here and that is the public nature and intentionality of the platform-specific issue.

Meta has been exposed for its algorithms serving inappropriate content to minors. Something that needs investigating, addressing and rectification? Absolutely. Served to a wide general population on the platform? No. Evidence of malicious intent? No.

Meanwhile, Musk's problematic behavior on X. Something that needs investigating, addressing and rectification? Absolutely. Served to a wide general population on the platform? Yes. Evidence of malicious intent? Yes.

There's a difference that should impact Disney's strategy across all platforms.

 

[Stripes]

Right, and while these companies are free to spend their money as they please, I personally think that's a crappy reason to pull advertising from the platform. It should be based on whether or not they see a good return on their investment, not whether they like the owner and the things he says on his personal account.

How would it be a good return on investment to associate yourself with Musk during a period of intensely divisive comments? Especially when Twitter is already well known to have a low ROI for advertisers.

Or at this point to spend millions of dollars and then people view your company as weak for caving to someone that told you to “f off.” It’s not a good look.

 

[Brian]

How would it be a good return on investment to associate yourself with Musk? Especially when Twitter is already well known to have a low ROI for advertisers.

Or at this point to spend millions of dollars and then people view your company as weak for caving to someone that told you to “f off.” It’s not a good look.

I don't think they were guided by a fear of poor ROIs by being associated with Musk. Rather, I suspect at least some of them were motivated by pettiness against him personally, and wanting to see him and X fail.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think it's worth pointing out the hypocrisy of pulling ads from X, allegedly due to the content that's shared there, while continuing to advertise on platforms where similarly abhorrent content is shared. Earlier on in this thread, TikTok was shared as an example, and now Meta platforms.

That's why I don't think it's about the content of the platforms, it's about Elon personally, and what he has said and done.

There is a huge difference from doing nothing and trying but failing.

not whether they like the owner and the things he says on his personal account.

Why do you keep harping on this bogus disingenuous point? The site prioritizes Musk’s content.

 

[Brian]

Exactly. There's also a nuance here and that is the public nature and intentionality of the platform-specific issue.

Meta has been exposed for its algorithms serving inappropriate content to minors. Something that needs investigating, addressing and rectification? Absolutely. Served to a wide general population on the platform? No. Evidence of malicious intent? No.

Meanwhile, Musk's problematic behavior on X. Something that needs investigating, addressing and rectification? Absolutely. Served to a wide general population on the platform? Yes. Evidence of malicious intent? Yes.

There's a difference that should impact Disney's strategy across all platforms.

I think you're attributing to malice something that can be attributed to stupidity. Musk didn't post what he posted because he wanted to be hateful, he posted it, as he admitted*, as a mistake.

*The admission:

“I mean, look, I’m sorry for that … post,” he said. “It was foolish of me. Of the 30,000 it might be literally the worst and dumbest post I’ve ever done. And I’ve tried my best to clarify six ways from Sunday, but you know at least I think it’ll be obvious that in fact far from being antisemitic, I’m in fact philosemitic.”

 

[LSLS]

I don't think they were guided by a fear of poor ROIs by being associated with Musk. Rather, I suspect at least some of them were motivated by pettiness against him personally, and wanting to see him and X fail.

I bet it's the opposite. People who work in marketing here have said that returns on twitter are actually very low. I don't think it's because they have some personal hatred of Musk, I think it's because it never was a great return, and this is an excuse to make a big show about how much they care while getting out of a platform that wasn't worth it.

 

[J4546]

Right, and while these companies are free to spend their money as they please, I personally think that's a crappy reason to pull advertising from the platform. It should be based on whether or not they see a good return on their investment, not whether they like the owner and the things he says on his personal account.

Maybe they arent seeing a good return on investment?