Brand reputation. Every brand that chooses to use X implicitly supports X, even if they're not verified & paying X money.
replyDoes anyone seriously think EFF posting to X yesterday tarnished their brand? Be real.
replyThe advertisers that evaporated and left behind a lot of no label dropshipping scams seem to think so. Did a lot of them eventually come back because there is some audience to squeeze numbers from? Sure, but I also wouldn't negate that many didn't and aren't coming back because it is Elon's playground now.
replyYes, people do in fact judge others for their associations.
replyIf you don't that is fine but I imagine you would also hold the view that not posting on X shouldn't be controversial then either.
My neighbor blares Fox in their kitchen every day. I view them with the same flavor of suspicion as someone who posts there.
replyYeah, I do. People & brands having a link to an X account is a huge red flag. It's a public statement that you support child pornography and the end of democracy in the US. That's going to tarnish a brand pretty majorly.
replyYes, absolutely. The CEO of X did Nazi salutes and promotes white genocide narratives, Grok has created posts praising Hitler, and when people used Grok to publicly generate CSAM for free, they fixed it by putting it behind a subscription platform. The only people I know and respect who are still on X are sex workers, because X is still the most porn-friendly social media site.
replyWhen you say "Be real", you're pleading with people to take your statement more seriously. But it's simply the case that people have very strong and negative opinions about nazis and child pornography.
some of the things you believe aren't true, no matter how strongly you believe them
reply[flagged]
replyI do, yeah. Hope that helps!
replyYes.
replyI applaud the move and only wish they would have done it sooner.
Not really, this is the kind of argument you only ever see on Reddit/HN, normal people don't care.
replyWho is "normal" in this context? Because people who support the EFF's mission are pretty clued into what is happening and do care.
replyAll dozen bloosky users have been sure to chime in as well.
replyGoing against the network effect out of principal doesn't seem to be a winning strategy when the goal is to raise awareness about issues.
replyThat is idiotic.
replyI've coded a 3rd party tool that could post to mastodon/twitter at the same time around 2020 (plenty of idle time during covid). I lost twitter API access, never bothered to try to make it work again (i hate working with interface clickers). to be clear, i don't really post on social media, it was just an experiment because i had faaar too much time and thought at the time that this kind of product could be interesting.
replyBut i would bet social media managers use similar tools, and the fact that no one can access twitter API might add just the little bit of friction you want to avoid.
deleted
replyNo, they even would get money for the engagement they get. This is purely moral grandstanding disguised as something else.
replyNot sure this is true anymore. X is now just pay to play. Organic engagement is completely dead there. It's all a virality game now.
replyMoral grandstanding is much better then vice grandstanding. Moral grandstandings are good, especially in a world that think being moral makes you a looser.
replyThat being said, there is no disguise.