Netflix Resumes Advertising on X After Elon Musk Controversy::Netflix has resumed advertising on X following a suspension by the streamer and other brands after Elon Musk promoted an antisemitic post.

  • assembly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    211
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    I am so tired of being so disappointed in companies. Was there ever a time when they weren’t just completely soulless? Is there truly no bottom to their ethics?

    • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      145
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      In school I had to take Business Ethics. The processor officially renamed the course to Ethical Issues in Business, because, as he explained it in class, business has no ethics, but ethical issues arise all the time. I took it to mean that capitalism destroyed humanity, and those of us that are still left humane must deal with ethical issues in a business (ethicless) setting.

      • assembly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I did not take business classes so limited background but if we assume that the US isn’t going to magically transition away from capitalism, we instead have to find a way to legislate a transition to a more ethical capitalism. That phrase seems to be an oxymoron but for things to not keep getting progressively worse I’m thinking we as a society need to figure out a way to make it happen. Any ideas? You seem to have at least taken a course in the matter.

      • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Business really has no ethics, and it needs no ethics: its main and only goal is to make money. Government’s job is to define the ethics, and create and enforce a framework in which businesses may operate.

        The reason why businesses shouldn’t be responsible for acting ethically is that being unethical gives you an edge against your competition. So if we let companies have the main responsibility of how to behave, nice companies are penalized.

        The framework needs to be as simple and unambiguous as possible, because the more complex it is, the more it penalizes small and starting companies.

        • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          The people’s job is to define ethics. The government’s job is to uphold that definition. Governments can’t be expected to define ethics on their own.

        • rambaroo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          This is so fucking immoral it’s enraging. As if people aren’t involved with business and business doesn’t affect people. This psychotic bullshit is how companies end up murdering people and getting away with it. A blatant excuse for people to do whatever their greed compels them to, as if making money suddenly absolves them of any kind of responsibility to their community.

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        (Assuming you aren’t misremembering): That honestly sounds like a really shitty professor.

        Ethics are 100% a thing and more people need to improve their intelligence in that regard. What you CAN argue is that morality has no place in business (or engineering (or whatever)). But ethics are not morality or the law.

        At this point, I think everyone and their mother is aware of the concept of The Trolley Problem. And… that is pertinent for a reason. Are you going to send the metaphorical train careening into marginalized groups, your workers, your board, or even your family? Or, the inverse of that: Are you going to do something that means you can buy your kids really awesome xmas presents, your board new cars, your workers the nice ramen, or even a moment of lessened horror for trans forlk?

        And that ignores the various types of ethics. Even under utilitarianism, there are arguments that you are making a better net good for your board… if only because said marginalized groups suffer so much they will barely notice any relenting.

        Improved understanding of what ethics actually are helps to understand WHY good (or more likely) bad things are happening. And it helps those who are in a position to make those decisions to make an intelligent and rational, if not necessarily good, decision.


        Back in uni, all the engineering majors were required to take Ethics in Engineering. And it was very obvious who were the libertarian tech bros of the future during that course. But it also, honestly, is the most important course I took in undergrad and the one that has the most use.

        And, as a result, when I do recruiting trips/lectures, I tend to cover that topic. I have a nice slide deck of some of the latest horrifying late stage capitalism shit to come out of tech companies as well as whistle blowing stories and I go through it with the students to try to make them think about why they are learning while also finding the people who would be fun to work with or mentor more directly.

        • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          I didn’t say ethics had no place in business, nor that ethics wasn’t a thing. I said he renamed it, because business has no ethics. This is the same thing you were saying, but in a lot less words.

          • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            15
            ·
            9 months ago

            I realize words are scary, but maybe read them when you are going to reply to someone? Rather than just assume they must agree with you.

            Again, business has ethics. Balancing your fiduciary responsibilities with personal gain (and, in rare instances, societal benefit) is an ethical challenge. Do you choose to strictly follow your contractual/legal responsibilities or do you try to find a way to circumvent that for good or for ill?

            Yet again: Ethics are not morality

            • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              Lol. Someone woke up on the wrong side of the couch, didn’t they?

              What you describe isn’t business ethics, it’s an ethical issues in a business setting. Look, mate. I don’t really care that you may disagree or whether you have or don’t have good reading comprehension. But leave the reddit anger on reddit. Lemmy is for discourse, not for senseless arguments.

              • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                9 months ago

                Yes. Embracing ignorance and buzz words rather than understanding how the world actually works and what levers and knobs there are and aren’t to work with. THAT is the enlightened standpoint.

    • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      9 months ago

      Capitalism by its nature will carry out unethical behavior if it means profit. So no, business was always soulless. That’s why regulation needs to exist, so the penalty for unethical behavior will negate the profit they could make from it.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Ethics never enter the equation. The highest priority in business is capital, and any company at the level of Netflix follows that maxim religiously. They may be seen following progressive trends, but any good they end up doing only stems from it being profitable to do so.

      In other words - no, companies have never not been soulless, and it serves us well to always remember that.

    • MajinBlayze@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      Ethics are a luxury that can be sold like any other, but when times get hard and cuts must be made, ethical companies get devoured by those that are not.

    • maryjayjay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Would Elon be willing to pay high profile companies to advertise on Xitter to entice others back? Of just give them advertising for free? Or… Resume running ads from customers who cancelled just to change public perception?

      I’m not saying Netflix isn’t a big enough bag of dicks to start advertising with them again, just contemplating

      • roofuskit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        136
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Conservatives: “If you don’t like a business vote with your wallet, we don’t need regulations.”

        People: boycotts business

        Conservatives: “No, not like that.”

        • diviledabit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          You’re supposed to not like a business based on how much they support gay rights!!!

        • იႦაႵმყიიႶ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          9 months ago

          Prrreeettty sure that was the left when people from all sides boycott BL because of Dylan and Targets shenanigans. So here is this version

          Left: “If you don’t like a business vote with your wallet, we don’t need regulations.”

          People of all sorts, mostly right: boycotts business

          Left: “No, not like that.”

        • Vanon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          9 months ago

          I cancelled (again) because… let me think. Apparently they nuke your account if you don’t use it for, say, 6-9 months (nice). All ratings, history, watchlist, etc: Fuck you, gone. Could not disable ads, AKA autoplay previews. Quality of content massively decreasing. Cost increasing (and never any deals). Mediocrity hit them hard years ago.

          • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            TbF, If that nuke is true, I wish more subscription services did that as it’s better than me realizing 18 months later that I’m not using it anymore but have still been autopaying the bill. Presuming of course there is an email or phone call warning in case you want to keep it active.

            • Vanon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              They nuke if you cancel for a few months. There are so many services, I only want maybe 1-2 at a time, and honestly need zero, could just use Plex. (If you forget you’re sub’d, they will never nuke or let you know.)

        • random65837@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          29
          ·
          9 months ago

          And there’s nothing wrong with that, that’s not cancel culture, that’s not giving a scumbag company money, that’s how it’s supposed to work.

          • prole@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yeah, people should instead be shooting their Netflix subscription with AR-15s (it’s symbolic, ok?) and posting it on YouTube.

            Everyone knows that’s how you really show your disapproval for a company.

      • sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        51
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Is cancelling subscriptions part of cancel culture now?

        I mean…I guess…technically…

        Edit: wow I interpreted that comment very wrong.

        • random65837@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          32
          ·
          9 months ago

          No shortage of people cancel services because of a single thing one person or says, or because they place an ad on a platform that’s popular to bash because of a political view with no direct reason otherwise, so yes, it’s pretty common.

          • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            9 months ago

            It’s almost like people in the United States have the freedom to express their opinions on a matter. Imagine that!

      • puppy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        9 months ago

        What camp where you on when Bud Light changed their brand colors this year? I am asking this as a serious question.

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        Not everybody lives their lives based on political cancel culture.

        Just the people who tried to cancel Rock and Roll, Heavy Metal, D&D, The Dixie Chicks, teaching black history, books, trans people, gay people, abortions…

      • Snapz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        True enough that not everybody does (also it’s “consequence culture”, but I digress), but the energy of your post is COMPLETELY this…

        “OH YEAH? Well we don’t ALL wipe ourselves after were shit okay?? It’s natural and it’s a choice… get over it, bro!!!”

  • Muyal_Hix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Now watch as all the corporations that paused their advertising slowly return to the platform.

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      9 months ago

      I mean, who didnt expect it to happen?

      Its literally what they did the last time there was a major controversy with twitter.

      They pull advertising because they dont want to be caught in the splash damage, not because they are actually offended at the behavior.

      As soon as the outrage dies down, the advertising resumes.

  • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    “Ahh, it’s been a week, no one remembers that ol Elon Musk agreeing with Nazi rhetoric thingy. Let’s spool those ads up again. We’re definitely seeing a return on our marketing budget by advertising on the platform known for being mostly bots!”

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      If there is a large following of Trump who is regurgitating Nazi rhetoric… it unfortunately makes sense to keep marketing at least here.

  • paddirn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    9 months ago

    That was like what, a whole month or less? Whew, that must’ve been tough on them!

    • random65837@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      71
      ·
      9 months ago

      More like realizing how much they were losing, on top of how bad their numbers have been for years…

      • Lianodel@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        49
        ·
        9 months ago

        You make it sound like they were losing because they pulled advertising from Twitter instead of… practically every other decision they make.

      • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Business does go down when a company stops advertising. My guess is that Netflix didn’t give a shit about the moral panic, not that there was ever an indication that they cared in the first place.

  • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Maybe I know nothing about business but why would Netflix even need to advertise there? I’m not even sure they have to advertise at all anymore.

  • JoMiran@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    If they just want to throw money away on ineffective advertising, they can just send it to me. I have a few ideas that are far more effective than Twat.

    • paddirn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      9 months ago

      Netflix spent about $1.5 billion on advertising in 2022. They could just randomly give a million people +$1000 and probably get better word-of-mouth advertising that way.

  • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    There probably were a lot of discussions and negotiations, but a lot of the public only sees Netflix going back to Twitter. I’m sure Elmo fans will promote this as Netflix having to bow down

  • elbucho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    I think if I hadn’t dropped Netflix when they did a 180 on their stance on password sharing, I would drop them now.