Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by TheRealDunkirk 1329 days ago
"Advertisers" advertised on Rush Limbaugh. They keep advertising on Fox News. It'll just draw different advertisers.

Advertisers are going to go where the money is. Will the changing demographics make the platform more money for advertisers, or less? That's all they care about.

Incidentally, if it means there's even a chance that we stop seeing even a small percentage of )(&@(#& Liberty Mutual ads, I'm all for whatever that takes.
1 comments
threeseed 1329 days ago
Might want to look more closely into the types of advertisers on Rush Limbaugh etc.

It was bail bonds services, gold, male vitamins, pillows etc.

Not nearly as profitable as say Nike, GM, Sony, Apple etc.

link
TheRealDunkirk 1329 days ago
Oh, I get it, but your conjecture was that Twitter wouldn't make enough money from advertising to stay in business. If these kinds of ads make enough money for Rush (in the old days) and Fox to stay at the number 1 spots in their category, then what do they care?
link
teawrecks 1329 days ago
In 1991, the Information Council for the Environment was founded by the National Coal Association with the expressed purpose of fabricating uncertainty around climate science.

They provided multiple scripts to Simmons Advertising for Rush Limbaugh to read and pass off as his personal dark horse take on climate policy.

Refer to pages 9 and 12 in the PDF linked below [2].

Would you say the coal industry wasn't a very profitable group? Do you think this is the only group who leveraged Limbaugh's voice to deliberately spread misinformation?

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Council_for_the_... [2] https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/07/Cl...

link
TheRealDunkirk 1329 days ago
Fauci and the CDC have used the networks and elite newspapers to sell the idea that the vaccine prevented transmission of COVID, which has now shown to have been a known lie. How far down this rabbit hole do you want to go? I mean, this kind of media manipulation has been going around since doctors endorsed smoking as good for your health on TV ads. My personal take -- RE: Twitter -- is that this sort of thing needs sunlight and fresh air to sanitize it, not the government or corporations trying to filter it out.
link
teawrecks 1329 days ago
The claim was: "the types of advertisers on Rush Limbaugh etc. [were] Not nearly as profitable as say Nike, GM, Sony, Apple etc."

That claim is false and I provided evidence to show it.

As for your whataboutism: that's patently untrue and you know it. Transmission rate and vaccination rate are very clearly inversely related no matter what dataset you're referencing.

But you're correct, misinformation knows no bounds, be it right wing radio or the comments section of a tech forum. The best we can do is vet sources sufficiently, or otherwise learn to disregard unfounded claims as random noise.

link