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: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday October 30 2017, @05:49PM (2 children)
As did just about every other country. Canada, Mexico, the UK, you name it. None of them have clean hands.
[CITATION NEEDED]
It's illegal for foreign organizations to purchase ads in US elections.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @03:51AM
Illegal where? Over in not-the-usa? Why would anyone believe that not-the-usa should care about usa law?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:38AM
Funny, I don't remember seeing any ads during the actual poll for the last election I *hrk* cast a vote in.
Maybe you need to clarify your terms, or provide citations of your own, lest you accuse basically every large corporation in existence of criminal activity. Okay, okay, criminal activity specifically relating to "purchasing ads in US elections", which of course has some sort of undefined nebulous meaning.