SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
After RT published excerpts from Twitter's "limited offer" to spend millions on US election marketing, the company abruptly banned all advertising from the news network. This makes full disclosure and transparency imperative, so here goes.
On Thursday, the micro-blogging platform announced a policy decision to ban ads from RT and Sputnik, citing alleged meddling in the 2016 US election.
It followed Twitter's report implying that RT was trying to influence US public opinion, crucially without providing context that virtually all news media organizations spend money on advertising their news coverage.
...
RT was thereby forced to reveal some details of the 2016 negotiations during which Twitter representatives made an exclusive multi-million dollar advertising proposal to spend big during the US presidential election, which was turned down.Having since been banned, and in order to set the record straight, we are publishing Twitter's presentation and details of the offer in full.
Lenin said it: "The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them."
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @02:12PM (9 children)
The campaign was about $2 billion, with 2/3 of that spent for Hillary and 1/3 of that spent by Trump. (heh... financial responsibility)
Russian ads were about $100 thousand.
So, it matters because 100 is bigger than 2 maybe? No. That isn't how numbers work.
2,000,000,000 vs. 100,000
That is a 20000:1 ratio. I wish this were easier to explain to somebody who has trouble with numbers. Look, suppose you are buying a new car, and the dealer offers a doughnut to sweeten the offer. IT DOES NOT MATTER.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @02:37PM
Mmm, donuts! [youtube.com]
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @02:42PM (2 children)
yet it is a convenient point to harp on in order misdirect 'the public' attention.
the rule is: always always project what you are doing in secret on your opponent.
hillary is/was one of the masters of this. also, the fact that reasoning skills are not encultured, while snap emotional reactions are entrained via all media is what's meaningful here.. glad that you noticed that it the topic has no rational merit. go figure out why thats a thing!
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday October 30 2017, @06:16PM (1 child)
the rule is: always always project what you are doing in secret on your opponent.
Which is exactly what you are doing right now.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:41AM
Did you just post the equivalent of "I know you are, but what am I?"
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @03:57PM (1 child)
Unfortunately, as part cost saving measure, part humanitarian reason, all mental health institutions were closed int his country. The people who would be sent there, not the best or the brightest of us (although some can be bright) now live among us. We couldn't really employ them, because crazy people do not do a damn thing that is productive, so we sent them all to colleges. Now the problem has festered for too long, and we are feeling the long-term effects. These people are exiting after 10+ years in "Higher Education" with their shinny diplomas in Gender Studies, and the likes, and the outcome is fucking horrendous on the society.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:01PM
It started out like it might have a real point, because indeed Reagan closed down all the mental health institutions. The rest is just stupid trolling.
I would much rather have a hare brained liberal arts major than the bigoted rednecks that actually kill people and cause real problems. But that is just me.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday October 30 2017, @05:02PM (1 child)
I've been amazed in the past at various reports of corruption where the dollar numbers were unexpectedly low (people making 6-7 figures taking 4-5 figures bribes for end-of-career moves). I've always wondered if it's because that's all that could be proven, or people are just that greedy.
In the case of twitter, it's interesting that RT, for that $1.5M Twitter wanted, could have easily hired over a hundred people to post day and night...
(Score: 3, Informative) by NewNic on Monday October 30 2017, @06:29PM
It shows that one of the following is true:
1. There are a lot more bribes that could not be found or proven
2. It does not require intelligence to rise to a position where one can earn large amounts.
3. Greed dominates everything for some people.
4. Some people with large incomes live paycheck to paycheck, and the small bribes still have a significant impact to their personal feelings of wealth (this is really a subset of 2. above).
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @05:22PM
So the noise was only 43 decibels below the signal. That's got to make a difference!