If these companies leave Twitter it becomes better value for other companies to use them as an advertising platform. The free market will save the day. The boycotters are forming a cartel which is illegal.
Cartels are also illegal in Australia. It also wasn't just the cartel that decided to stop advertising ok x, they actively engaged with other companies to put pressure on them to stop advertising. If each company, decided for themselves not to advertise, or they couldn't prove they acted as a cartel, then this would have not been a case.
Whilst their motivation may be about silencing right wing voices or free speech, the issue is the impact their conduct has/had on competition. Their behaviour makes their market less competitive, especially where they are in the same industry, but also the advertising industry itself.
"Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when one person intentionally damages someone else's contractual or business relationships with a third party, causing economic harm. As an example, someone could use blackmail to induce a contractor into breaking a contract; they could threaten a supplier to prevent them from supplying goods or services to another party; or they could obstruct someone's ability to honor a contract with a client by deliberately refusing to deliver necessary goods." When Elon bought Twitter, what he really got was a crime scene. Many government officials and other persons are headed for Federal courts and prisons. What is being exposed are the first glimpses of the vastest organized crime cartel in world history.
There's a big difference between consumers boycotting a brand for what ever reason, and then owners of competing brands conspiring together to have a business shut down. And to make excuses and question what the difference is really stinks! It's anti free market!
Companies are actually free to come together to boycott or support someone. Maybe other companies can sue Musk and ring wing media fir telling people to boycott certain things. Or do those not count?
@@Unmutual-23 Ah, but corporations have potentially UNLIMITED LIFE which no human has been able to do... even though some have promised eternal life. BS
😂😂 no buddy. It’s the free market and Elon says he loves freedom of speech. And it’s freedom of speech to decide not to advertise on a platform. Ridiculous that you think otherwise.
@@jorgearellano9204 no, it’s not the free market. All of these companies get subsidized or quid pro quo’s from the U.S. government. These so called “too big to fail” companies are the biggest welfare recipients of the U.S. government, in essence, there isn’t really a free market and hasn’t been for decades. Without government interference, there wouldn’t be so many monopolies like Apple, Microsoft, Boeing etc. Government has been picking the winners and losers for a long time.
No... It's about a small and unrepresentative group signposting state approved advertising behaviours. Unfortunately as a not for profit they will just fold and another will take it's place. Obviously any company can make it's own decisions on advertising.
@@jorgearellano9204 This is not a freedom of speech issue, it’s an antitrust issue. Go read a book and do some research beyond listening to your echo chambers.
@@RogueElementMkII Sometimes/often the road to hell is paved with good intentions However this is the battle in front of us and we need to win this one 1st before discovering what the fallout might be Neuralinks do have a lot of good potential, that is why free speech is imperative so as a society we are informed and can discuss the pro & cons of ideas in a sensible manner We lose this fight and those other bad things are still going to happen, only thing is we get no warning and won't know what hit us Free speech gives us a fighting chance of straightening the road out so we don't get caught off guard by any radical malevolent intent from which ever side of the political isle it manifests itself from
@@hplovecraft1402What Elon Musk is doing, has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech. If you think this guy is on your side, then you've already lost. There is no good potential with Neuralink whatsoever, or with anything else he is selling. Every single project he is working on, will ultimately be used to enslave humanity, not save it. He is a false prophet at the very least.
Why do globalists hate the truth? Because it could change everyone's minds about wokeness. Klaus Schwab is a dictator and wants to force everyone to be 100% body and soul dedicated to the rules of wokeness. Therefore, the truth is absolutely frightening to globalists because believers can never be controlled. Being that the WEF is a coming dictatorship, eventually, they will outlaw all human rights, and eventually start executing people who choose to disobey their rules.
I hope Musk prevails - those wanting to restrict “hate speech” for the benefit of humanity, forget that the road to hell is paved with good intentions !!!
I think you're missing the point. The concern is not that the freedoms or rights of the advertisers to decide by what rules they invest their money, the concern is that these companies are colluding outside of any and all regular business dealings, without any form of oversight or accountability to the public, the policies of their countries or their staff and shareholders. It's a cadre of gangsters overtly capitalising on the inadequacies of the current society to curtail this sort of bullish endeavour.
@patrickmc.2011 True, but Disney's sheer incompetence in terms of forseeing what the public wants in entertainment is a huge contributor. Get woke, go broke.
@@ABanRocks what? You are in a lala land!! Do you call back being worth 50% of what it used to be worth? Huh really Disney used to be 190 a share it’s trading right now at 90 you call that back??? I guess you believe bidenomics is working right? Naaa that’s not back that’s down over 50 percent not back. Glad you are not a ceo of anything.
X is the last Speaker's Corner. With the crackdowns on free speech all around the world, we should all be supporting the format. People have a right to have an opinion, and people have the right to be offended. Act like adults and deal with it!
It would be if they planned on returning but prices has plummeted and they did not buy advert spots. Its not illegal in the USA to not support a company. He has no merit. It is also not illegal to boycott a company in the USA.
@@PivotDJ no it’s. It illegal to not support a company duhhh! What is illegal is for multiple companies to conspire together to take down competitors! Do you think musk is going into this Willy nilly? You don’t think his team of the best lawyers in the world aren’t advising him what to do???
@@patrickmc.2011 But its not a takedown they were clear about the climate he was cultivating online. Speaking with violent overtone, mismanaging the platform, failed to keep promises, a mess for PR. They warned him. HE even told them to go fuck themselves. Now he wants to sue that no one wants to advertise on his platform? No merit.
If, corporate groups went out of their way to shut down a newspaper via economic warfare, so as to stop it printing options they don't like, there would be hell on. This isn't about freedom to not advertise. It's gang bullying for hidious reasons. ❤ from Northeast England ❤️
These companies are completely free to not advertise with X. They can do what they like. They can boycott him if they want. They can say "poopoo weewee" if they want. Free market. There is no legal requirement for them to advertise with X. Elon telling advertisers, the lifeblood of his business, "eff you"...... was a silly thing to do. Elon is silly. This is a tantrum with no legal basis.
@@ShblibbleYou are Ignorant to the Point. Elon told them to go “f. Themselves”, because they were publicly saying X should censor certain material! But the point here goes further by colluding with others to restrict business with X. There is a definite case for a “restrictive trade practise” and there is a definite case for Collusion to Monopolise. If these companies can do it to X - then they can do it to others!. Its at the very core of the reason he bought X - Freedom Of Speech but most people are too Stupid to see it.
@@Shblibbleno they aren’t. A government push to stifle unwanted speech is not free market. What Elon has been doing is fighting against government efforts to control social media so that only comments and arguments that suit their agenda are allowed. It’s a push towards totalitarianism which is the antithesis of representative governments as well as free markets. To inform yourself further on this particular issue, check out Glenn Greenwald’s take on the lawsuit.
@@alienware_gaming4085 Why? so you can go on a completely irrelevant tangent and ignore that Elons case has no merit? Advertisers choosing not to advertise with X is a free market decision they are completely allowed to make. 100% legal. Elon told them to eff off and they did. They called his bluff and now he look stupid and X is struggling. Marketing 101. Don’t piss off your customers.
The point is this… The US was a free market - anti-monopoly (bc monopolies rule the world and free markets die bc no one can compete) national. Since the 1970s, which I think was the last time a company was forced to breakup and sell pieces of its company bc it had become monopoly-the Bell company, a phone company. Since then the food industry, media/communications industry, and tech, have all converged into only a handful of companies. They acquired smalller companies and used the na es to give an illusion of diverse companies and it wasn’t until the last 15-20 yrs where people are realizing what’s really going on! The oligarchs of these companies now run the govt. politicians are beholden to these companies that give to their campaigns, they even have the power to force govt to charge people, have them tried and silenced bc they don’t like what’s being said. (Coughalexjones). And thanks to obamas repeal of the ‘law making it illegal to use propaganda on our citizens’, all media regardless of form is in a race to see who can out propagandize who! They are insidious regarding this!! And THIS is why it’s wrong for these companies trying to shut down anything/anyone it deems as a threat!! Everything we are seeing taking place in the west is all Marxist tactics and they’ve been working non-stop for over 100 yrs with the snowball theory! Only now instead of a snowball it’s an avalanche!!
Whining about businesses not wanting to advertise with Twitter (naming it X was like Prince naming himself a love symbol but worse. ). He sounds like a spoiled brat, "But you have to advertise with me, that's the free market". Hilarious.
@David_Beames I watched a interview on abc with Paul k about how Australia can defend ourselves without alias , bs, can't comment as abc has comments for that interview turned off???? off ??????????
@@EL_Duderino68 Forming a cartel to control advertisers so as to hurt a business is called a Trust and is monopolistic. Just because you don't like Elon doesn't mean he is wrong.
Mr. Bond is right. Advertisers should determine where to spend their money. In the U.S. the problem comes when advertisers conspire to harm third parties. It's the conspiracy that's unlawful. Think about it like this: If Coke decides to pull their advertising from X, they leave that market to Pepsi. Coke is harmed, perhaps X is harmed. Pepsi benefits. If Coke and Pepsi conspire to pull advertising from X, an innocent third party, X, is harmed. If Coke and Pepsi make the same decisions independently, X is harmed, but it's not a legal problem. That isn't what happened. A congressional investigation found that companies run by leftist fanatics conspired to keep revenue away from a company, X, that allows users to say truthful things that offend wokies. On the face of it, this appears to be unlawful conduct, specifically, violations of anti-trust laws. U.S. anti-trust law is written to protect innocent third parties from this sort of conduct, whether the conduct is by a single company with enough market power to do this by itself, or a combination of companies with enough combined market power to pull it off conspiring to do the same thing. It appears X has filed suit based on this second prohibition, though one could argue that many of the companies they have sued have enough market power to sustain the lawsuit by itself.
Indeed. This is corporate oligarchism not much different in practice than a monopoly, hence the anti-trust statutes as you point out. Interestingly, using your example, if Coke and Pepsi pull out, that in theory does let another cola company like Royal Crown to step in, but to your point, they are so much smaller that the damage is still done.
There is no binding agreement which says pepsi and coke has to pull out. Second of even if they did, which law is broken?! Can you give anything in specific?!Also it's advertisement. It's not a good or service and it doesn't effect functioning of twitter. Elon isn't entitled to ad Money. Can you tell which anti trust law in specific says anything about ads?! Have you ever read any anti trust law?!
@@davidford3115 Section 1: Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal. Section 2: Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor [. . . ] Here copy pasted it. Can you tell how it is broken?!
These pulling the ads were basically doing that for a reason to have power over the site. It was totally a blackmail what they did. Never mind that they still have their brands in the platform and doing ads in there they share to sell their product. Like posting their new product and let people share it like and fallow
It's not blackmail. There is no legal requirement for any given company to advertise on X. They can all pull their spend and they are free to do so. That's the free market in action. It's just that Elon doesn't like it. He told them "eff you" after all. I am completely not surprised they decided to walk away. Free market in action. Boo hoo.
All they are doing is making a decision to not advertise with X. Multiple companies banded together as part of a co-ordinated decision. A free willed decision. Everyone involved here is free to do whatever they are doing. Elon is also free to launch a frivilous court case...... not that he will win.
@@seventhson27 no it does not the companies Elon is suing have completely different interests than “X” . This lawsuit will be thrown out as frivolous or fail spectacularly. All this lawsuit reveals is that Musk moved to Texas because it’s the only place country that the hack right wing judges would hear it .
So If I feel Twitter, X is crap and would tell, argue with anyone I know or can reach that they should not use or advertize on X because of that, I'm illegally conspiraing? 😂😂😂 I thought Elon Musk used to call that free speech...
@@GaganSingh-nx2yv The govt is just a company that does what rich people want. They have the money to fund campaigns, they have the money to organize protests, they have the money to hire lobbyists, they pay the bribes, they hire the lawyers.
Companies do have the right to choose whom they advertise with, this suit is not about that. It's about creating a cartel outside of the free market to attack another company because you disagree with their views. Thanks
No one who cherishes freedom - which starts with freedom on speech should use their products. _The price of freedom, is sometimes your feelings get hurt!_ *(BTW; They were forming a cartel of companies too attack a competitor)*
Liz is absolutely right, and this is more about CENSORSHIP. Just remember Mars, Nestle, Cadbury’s etc are all OWNED BY VANGUARD BLACKROCK and SMART STREET
Elon Musk has a great case. This is a clear violation of the Rico law. This carries criminal consequence since racketeering is illegal in the USA. Your guest seems to be very stupid when it comes to the topic of companies coordinating to destroy another company. The coordination is called racketeering.
@@truth_hearts_1940 Of course it is a threat, but perhaps an enabler may be more concise. It enables people to freely criticize them - making "X" a threat.
@@martinrayner6466 you don’t know what the word competitor means. That means they sell a similar product, Twitter doesn’t sell soda or running shoes they’re not a competitor.
Both are part of Comcast Global Media holdings. MSNBC is marketed as a product geared towards Moderates. Sky News is marketed as a product for Right Wingers, not even Conservatives. Comcast does this because they don't care where their dollars come from, so they cover all the markets no matter how base.
Really? Because this Australian division is actually politically to the right of FoxNews. They are closer to One America News, Tucker Carlson, and Bill O'Reily.
From Wikipedia "A cartel is a group of independent market participants who collude with each other as well as agreeing not to compete with each other[1] in order to improve their profits and dominate the market. A cartel is an organization formed by producers to limit competition and increase prices by creating artificial shortages through low production quotas, stockpiling, and marketing quotas." Is there such a thing as a cartel of ideas?
Liz is right. If Elon wasn't around we'd be seriously screwed. He put the brakes on the e-commissar, and he's now defending freedom of speech in the UK.
Great points on both sides. I think this is how media should be structured. If your news report is bias opinions, then I think they must disclose that this news is for “entertainment only.”
@@davidford3115 Sure I'm totally up for that. Maybe you can stand in for him, as he wasn't the one who replied to me. Is that good with you or are you just going to complain about me (i.e. ad hominem)? Or can you step up and discuss the video. Don't slink away now. Also, you don't need to add the words personal attack, that's what ad hominem means. :) I look forward to seeing your knowledge and debating skills.
@@davidford3115 Oh and you can't spell "ad hominem". It's not "ad hominin" (embarrassing) You go right ahead and show me your debating skills mate. I hope they are better than your literacy skills. Let's go.
Sky News / foxtel have many many companies that will not spend advertising dollar's with them. Its called protecting your brand and is freedom of choice.
I was originally inclined to agree with the guy who says it's their right to say where their money is spent. After looking more deeply into it, I am convinced that these people must be stopped at any cost. These people will bring about a global tyrannical government ran by themselves if we blindly sit back and watch it play out. In fact, they have practically already done so. It's time to revolt against these entities in whatever peaceful way that we can and to require that our governments use force, if necessary, to shut them down.
Except, the Anglo-world has turned its back on English Common Law holding it in contempt. From Australia during the lockdowns, to New Zealand's hate speech laws targeted at critics of Islam to the US government engaging in lawfare to stifle political opposition, we are FAR from the standards which made English Culture the preeminent culture and justice system in the world. And the world is worse off for it.
Wait ... this is the same guy who, publicly, on global media, literally told his advertisers "go fuck yourselves," in EXACTLY THOSE WORDS, and is now upset that THEY want nothing to do with HIM?
Hu? How is that guy so dumb? He does know you cannot just collude to boycott another company. Ever heard of antitrust law? Amazing you all had a 10 minute conversation about this and clearly nobody even read a single word about what the suit is even about.
@@ScottWatson-p4w Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/ FASH-iz-əm) is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2][3] characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.[2][3] Opposed to anarchism, democracy, pluralism, egalitarianism, liberalism, socialism, and Marxism,[4][5] fascism is placed on the far-right wing within the traditional left-right spectrum.[6][5][7] Wikipedia
I specifically recall Elon Musk saying that the advertisers could go and “f@#k” themselves if they didn’t want to advertise on twitter (X). I agreed with him then because those companies, as his comment intimated, had a right to advertise wherever they chose. Apparently, their “f@#king” of themselves is now causing him some pain. Financial pain. Hence, the seeming walk back of that comment and the current lawsuit. This one is going to be a good watch. Popcorns to the ready.
@@consequences5638 Probably not. It's difficult to get real justice these days when you have corrupt, woke judges, all politically driven. I know what you mean.
@@EL_Duderino68 Australia. Which is pretty noteworthy. My experience in Australia was that it had the most oppressive government and local governments of any western country I’ve visited. People are delightful though.
Couldn't have bette man to be on our side. If free speech is limited than it's not freedom of speech anymore. It's not my concern if somebody if triggered cuz he's weak,I won't censor myself.
I think Caleb Bond is correct and the court case will probably go as he suggests. Unfortunately there is a culture war going on and there are no rules in war. Something that makes war so very terrible.
Elon is showing the way I’ll follow him. His values are much appreciated. He’s engagement and passion is amazing!!
If these companies leave Twitter it becomes better value for other companies to use them as an advertising platform. The free market will save the day. The boycotters are forming a cartel which is illegal.
Cartel behaviour is illegal. He is probably saying they are acting as a cartel
He isn't saying they are a Cartel, he is objectively observing the fact that they are a Cartel.
Cartels are also illegal in Australia. It also wasn't just the cartel that decided to stop advertising ok x, they actively engaged with other companies to put pressure on them to stop advertising.
If each company, decided for themselves not to advertise, or they couldn't prove they acted as a cartel, then this would have not been a case.
Whilst their motivation may be about silencing right wing voices or free speech, the issue is the impact their conduct has/had on competition.
Their behaviour makes their market less competitive, especially where they are in the same industry, but also the advertising industry itself.
There is nothing illegal in not buying ads with Twitter. I also remind you, that he literally asked the to go fck themselves.
Go Elon! Sue the pants off em! 😂
"Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when one person intentionally damages someone else's contractual or business relationships with a third party, causing economic harm. As an example, someone could use blackmail to induce a contractor into breaking a contract; they could threaten a supplier to prevent them from supplying goods or services to another party; or they could obstruct someone's ability to honor a contract with a client by deliberately refusing to deliver necessary goods."
When Elon bought Twitter, what he really got was a crime scene. Many government officials and other persons are headed for Federal courts and prisons. What is being exposed are the first glimpses of the vastest organized crime cartel in world history.
💯
You mean like the Unions in Australia? And the Labor Govt with the assistance of the Greens?
There's a big difference between consumers boycotting a brand for what ever reason, and then owners of competing brands conspiring together to have a business shut down. And to make excuses and question what the difference is really stinks! It's anti free market!
Companies are actually free to come together to boycott or support someone. Maybe other companies can sue Musk and ring wing media fir telling people to boycott certain things. Or do those not count?
Corporations are considered people in the US. So, no, there's no difference.
@@Unmutual-23 you missed the point...
@@Unmutual-23 Isn't one a conspiracy, and the other a choice?
@@Unmutual-23 Ah, but corporations have potentially UNLIMITED LIFE which no human has been able to do... even though some have promised eternal life. BS
Elon Musk - forever grateful for standing up and saying what must be said.
Weird how conservatives get angry at other people for using freedom of speech.
Elon Musk can stand up and admit he sucks and is dorky as hell
@@bryan2742 you won the most stupid comment of the day… 😂
Lizard? 😂
@@Unmutual-23 *Elon Musk:* "Don't advertise. Go fu-- yourself."
*GARM:* _doesn't advertise_
*X:* "Wait, that's illegal!"
Elon Musk is a blessing for this world, in such troublesome times for all of us
😂
Are you insane? 🤣Bootlicker...
He's a wonderful man.
Bless Musk. Both he and Vivek hold promise for the future.
Let it be your future then. I don't need either in mine.
@@Unmutual-23
Yes, lit it be.
True. ❤❤❤❤❤❤
Anti competitive behaviour is illegal. And number of companies planning together to bankrupt another company is anti competitive behaviour!
Free market does not mean no rules.
You can't force a customer to buy your stuff. That is what Elon want these companies to do.
He's 50 moves ahead of them and everyone. They're going to get destroyed.
Liz Storer is spot on. She is the voice of common sense.
Elon is the political Bruce Wayne! 😂
So fuck**g true😂, spot on he is Bruce Wayne
Elon still censors people on Twitter. And if you knew him in real life, he would not value you the way you value him. 100% guarantee it
Nice 😊
In what world??
More like Lex Luther
He doesn’t understand what GARM actually is. They are extorting companies to stop advertising with x and rumble.
This issue is about billion dollar companies deciding what the market should look like, and not the consumers.
😂😂 no buddy. It’s the free market and Elon says he loves freedom of speech. And it’s freedom of speech to decide not to advertise on a platform. Ridiculous that you think otherwise.
@@jorgearellano9204 Well you're a moron.🤣 You do realise this has nothing to do with free speech, and this is an antitrust issue. Read a book.🤣
@@jorgearellano9204 no, it’s not the free market. All of these companies get subsidized or quid pro quo’s from the U.S. government. These so called “too big to fail” companies are the biggest welfare recipients of the U.S. government, in essence, there isn’t really a free market and hasn’t been for decades.
Without government interference, there wouldn’t be so many monopolies like Apple, Microsoft, Boeing etc. Government has been picking the winners and losers for a long time.
No... It's about a small and unrepresentative group signposting state approved advertising behaviours. Unfortunately as a not for profit they will just fold and another will take it's place. Obviously any company can make it's own decisions on advertising.
@@jorgearellano9204 This is not a freedom of speech issue, it’s an antitrust issue. Go read a book and do some research beyond listening to your echo chambers.
The problem is that the taxpayer's money is involved. You cannot use tax money to censor the tax payers.
Elon Musk saving free speech 👍
For now... Then come the Neuralink BCI implants further down the track.
You will own nothing but think happy thoughts.
Advertising where you please is free speech genius. Elon is a hypocrite
@@RogueElementMkII Sometimes/often the road to hell is paved with good intentions However this is the battle in front of us and we need to win this one 1st before discovering what the fallout might be Neuralinks do have a lot of good potential, that is why free speech is imperative so as a society we are informed and can discuss the pro & cons of ideas in a sensible manner We lose this fight and those other bad things are still going to happen, only thing is we get no warning and won't know what hit us Free speech gives us a fighting chance of straightening the road out so we don't get caught off guard by any radical malevolent intent from which ever side of the political isle it manifests itself from
@@hplovecraft1402What Elon Musk is doing, has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech.
If you think this guy is on your side, then you've already lost.
There is no good potential with Neuralink whatsoever, or with anything else he is selling.
Every single project he is working on, will ultimately be used to enslave humanity, not save it.
He is a false prophet at the very least.
@@paulchilds9053 Tesla and Musk famously spend ZERO dollars on advertising , Karma is a beach 😅
IT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE SCARED OFF THE TRUTH!! GO ELON
Weird how conservatives get mad at people using their freedom of speech.
Your idiocy is showing- no conservative has said that idiots like you can’t voice your opinion. This conversation is a little too deep for you.
Why do globalists hate the truth? Because it could change everyone's minds about wokeness. Klaus Schwab is a dictator and wants to force everyone to be 100% body and soul dedicated to the rules of wokeness. Therefore, the truth is absolutely frightening to globalists because believers can never be controlled. Being that the WEF is a coming dictatorship, eventually, they will outlaw all human rights, and eventually start executing people who choose to disobey their rules.
@@Unmutual-23 Thanks for showing us the effects of being brainwashed by fake news media.
These fools have underestimated elon and have lost everytime. Get your KY jelly out. Its gunna hurt.
I hope Musk prevails - those wanting to restrict “hate speech” for the benefit of humanity, forget that the road to hell is paved with good intentions !!!
My opinion is the government’s hate speech, if the government puts these laws in you loose, welcome to socialism folks.
Those companies have an agenda that has nothing to do with "good intentions".
I think you're missing the point. The concern is not that the freedoms or rights of the advertisers to decide by what rules they invest their money, the concern is that these companies are colluding outside of any and all regular business dealings, without any form of oversight or accountability to the public, the policies of their countries or their staff and shareholders. It's a cadre of gangsters overtly capitalising on the inadequacies of the current society to curtail this sort of bullish endeavour.
There are 556 million X users. Boycott the advertisers who pull advertising.
Most of them are not active users and stopped using them already.
It is nazis selling crypto to porn bots at this point.
The lady is spot on!
If they’re boycotting X then people should be boycotting those companies as well.
@@theobserver3753 Disney has lost billions and billions since trying to take on musk!!!
@patrickmc.2011 True, but Disney's sheer incompetence in terms of forseeing what the public wants in entertainment is a huge contributor.
Get woke, go broke.
@patrickmc.2011 have they. The top two money making movies this year is Disney. Both earning way over a billions world wide. They are fully back.
@@ABanRocks what? You are in a lala land!! Do you call back being worth 50% of what it used to be worth? Huh really Disney used to be 190 a share it’s trading right now at 90 you call that back???
I guess you believe bidenomics is working right?
Naaa that’s not back that’s down over 50 percent not back. Glad you are not a ceo of anything.
X is the last Speaker's Corner. With the crackdowns on free speech all around the world, we should all be supporting the format. People have a right to have an opinion, and people have the right to be offended. Act like adults and deal with it!
It is the same as price fixing.
I said the same thing
It would be if they planned on returning but prices has plummeted and they did not buy advert spots. Its not illegal in the USA to not support a company. He has no merit. It is also not illegal to boycott a company in the USA.
@@PivotDJ no it’s. It illegal to not support a company duhhh! What is illegal is for multiple companies to conspire together to take down competitors!
Do you think musk is going into this Willy nilly? You don’t think his team of the best lawyers in the world aren’t advising him what to do???
You can't use a trade association or co-op to target companies on behalf of the members. It is restraint of trade.
@@patrickmc.2011 But its not a takedown they were clear about the climate he was cultivating online. Speaking with violent overtone, mismanaging the platform, failed to keep promises, a mess for PR. They warned him. HE even told them to go fuck themselves. Now he wants to sue that no one wants to advertise on his platform? No merit.
If, corporate groups went out of their way to shut down a newspaper via economic warfare, so as to stop it printing options they don't like, there would be hell on.
This isn't about freedom to not advertise. It's gang bullying for hidious reasons.
❤ from Northeast England ❤️
This conglomerate controls 90% of ALL advertising. It's corporate tyranny.
Public town square is the leading case law. Monetization is the protection of open and free speech. I hope Elon wins !
These companies are completely free to not advertise with X. They can do what they like. They can boycott him if they want. They can say "poopoo weewee" if they want. Free market.
There is no legal requirement for them to advertise with X.
Elon telling advertisers, the lifeblood of his business, "eff you"...... was a silly thing to do.
Elon is silly.
This is a tantrum with no legal basis.
@@Shblibblethey are not free to collude for the purpose of damaging his business.
@@SpeakingSeriously But they're not. They're simply choosing not to advertise on X.
And Elon doesn't like it.
That's it.
@@ShblibbleYou are Ignorant to the Point. Elon told them to go “f. Themselves”, because they were publicly saying X should censor certain material! But the point here goes further by colluding with others to restrict business with X. There is a definite case for a “restrictive trade practise” and there is a definite case for Collusion to Monopolise. If these companies can do it to X - then they can do it to others!. Its at the very core of the reason he bought X - Freedom Of Speech but most people are too Stupid to see it.
@@SpeakingSeriouslylawyers are going to have one hell of a time proving that without a reasonable doubt.
It isn't the free market, Caleb, it's a manipulation of the free market by something that sounds very much like a cartel, which is illegal.
Corporate oligarchism, which in practice is no different than a monopoly.
@@davidford3115 same as the google monopoly case
Monopoly capitalism is fabian socialism
Cartels are not a part of a free market.
Elon is the greatest!!!!! thank you Elon!
It's a tort because it is a conspiracy under pressure from GARM who threatened to damage those companies. This is the definition of racketeering.
It became illegal when these companies conspired together to destroy another company -X.
You (ALL OF YOU) need to look at what Musk is doing & saying, then you might know what is going on in the US!!
Go Elon! Stop this woke nonsense
You mean the free market decision to not advertise with X?
* GASP * - you guys aren't being hypocrites about the free market are you??!?
@@Shblibbleno they aren’t. A government push to stifle unwanted speech is not free market. What Elon has been doing is fighting against government efforts to control social media so that only comments and arguments that suit their agenda are allowed. It’s a push towards totalitarianism which is the antithesis of representative governments as well as free markets. To inform yourself further on this particular issue, check out Glenn Greenwald’s take on the lawsuit.
@@Shblibble before we begin with this rabbit hole, may I ask what your pronouns are?
@@alienware_gaming4085 Why? so you can go on a completely irrelevant tangent and ignore that Elons case has no merit?
Advertisers choosing not to advertise with X is a free market decision they are completely allowed to make. 100% legal.
Elon told them to eff off and they did. They called his bluff and now he look stupid and X is struggling.
Marketing 101. Don’t piss off your customers.
Companies don't want to fund far right lunies. Elon Musk isn't entitled to their money.
It’s basically price fixing at its worst
I stand with Musk
One would think the more people you have on X, the more diverse public, the more efficient would be advertising there 😕
It is, which is why boycotting was against companies own interest
They don't want to be seen with bigots.
X had lost a lot of users. Everyone in the left and middle have left. It is just right wing views now
The point is this…
The US was a free market - anti-monopoly (bc monopolies rule the world and free markets die bc no one can compete) national. Since the 1970s, which I think was the last time a company was forced to breakup and sell pieces of its company bc it had become monopoly-the Bell company, a phone company. Since then the food industry, media/communications industry, and tech, have all converged into only a handful of companies. They acquired smalller companies and used the na es to give an illusion of diverse companies and it wasn’t until the last 15-20 yrs where people are realizing what’s really going on! The oligarchs of these companies now run the govt. politicians are beholden to these companies that give to their campaigns, they even have the power to force govt to charge people, have them tried and silenced bc they don’t like what’s being said. (Coughalexjones). And thanks to obamas repeal of the ‘law making it illegal to use propaganda on our citizens’, all media regardless of form is in a race to see who can out propagandize who! They are insidious regarding this!! And THIS is why it’s wrong for these companies trying to shut down anything/anyone it deems as a threat!!
Everything we are seeing taking place in the west is all Marxist tactics and they’ve been working non-stop for over 100 yrs with the snowball theory! Only now instead of a snowball it’s an avalanche!!
X for Free Speech.
Thank you.
Elon is real what a legend for standing up for democracy.
He's egocentric and neo-technocratic.
He doesn't believe in democracy.
Whining about businesses not wanting to advertise with Twitter (naming it X was like Prince naming himself a love symbol but worse. ).
He sounds like a spoiled brat, "But you have to advertise with me, that's the free market". Hilarious.
@@EL_Duderino68 Not paying attention are you. It is a collusion between companies to hurt him which is a violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law.
@David_Beames I watched a interview on abc with Paul k about how Australia can defend ourselves without alias , bs, can't comment as abc has comments for that interview turned off???? off ??????????
@@EL_Duderino68 Forming a cartel to control advertisers so as to hurt a business is called a Trust and is monopolistic. Just because you don't like Elon doesn't mean he is wrong.
Mr. Bond is right. Advertisers should determine where to spend their money. In the U.S. the problem comes when advertisers conspire to harm third parties. It's the conspiracy that's unlawful. Think about it like this:
If Coke decides to pull their advertising from X, they leave that market to Pepsi. Coke is harmed, perhaps X is harmed. Pepsi benefits.
If Coke and Pepsi conspire to pull advertising from X, an innocent third party, X, is harmed.
If Coke and Pepsi make the same decisions independently, X is harmed, but it's not a legal problem. That isn't what happened.
A congressional investigation found that companies run by leftist fanatics conspired to keep revenue away from a company, X, that allows users to say truthful things that offend wokies. On the face of it, this appears to be unlawful conduct, specifically, violations of anti-trust laws.
U.S. anti-trust law is written to protect innocent third parties from this sort of conduct, whether the conduct is by a single company with enough market power to do this by itself, or a combination of companies with enough combined market power to pull it off conspiring to do the same thing. It appears X has filed suit based on this second prohibition, though one could argue that many of the companies they have sued have enough market power to sustain the lawsuit by itself.
Indeed. This is corporate oligarchism not much different in practice than a monopoly, hence the anti-trust statutes as you point out.
Interestingly, using your example, if Coke and Pepsi pull out, that in theory does let another cola company like Royal Crown to step in, but to your point, they are so much smaller that the damage is still done.
There is no binding agreement which says pepsi and coke has to pull out. Second of even if they did, which law is broken?! Can you give anything in specific?!Also it's advertisement. It's not a good or service and it doesn't effect functioning of twitter. Elon isn't entitled to ad Money.
Can you tell which anti trust law in specific says anything about ads?! Have you ever read any anti trust law?!
@@GaganSingh-nx2yv Sherman Anti-Trust law. Look it up, as this organization clearly fall under the statutes.
@@davidford3115 Section 1:
Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal.
Section 2:
Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor [. . . ]
Here copy pasted it. Can you tell how it is broken?!
@@davidford3115 I have read it. Ads aren't goods or services that corporations provide. So i don't see which section applies here.
These pulling the ads were basically doing that for a reason to have power over the site. It was totally a blackmail what they did.
Never mind that they still have their brands in the platform and doing ads in there they share to sell their product.
Like posting their new product and let people share it like and fallow
It's not blackmail.
There is no legal requirement for any given company to advertise on X.
They can all pull their spend and they are free to do so.
That's the free market in action. It's just that Elon doesn't like it.
He told them "eff you" after all.
I am completely not surprised they decided to walk away.
Free market in action.
Boo hoo.
Racketeering isn’t freemarket.
CONSPIRING TO DRIVE some company out of business is NOT "Free Enterprise."
All they are doing is making a decision to not advertise with X. Multiple companies banded together as part of a co-ordinated decision. A free willed decision.
Everyone involved here is free to do whatever they are doing.
Elon is also free to launch a frivilous court case...... not that he will win.
@@seventhson27 advertisers choosing not to advertise along side white supremacist is freedom
@@gregorymilla9213 Nope, It falls under the anti-monopoly laws.
@@seventhson27 no it does not the companies Elon is suing have completely different interests than “X” . This lawsuit will be thrown out as frivolous or fail spectacularly. All this lawsuit reveals is that Musk moved to Texas because it’s the only place country that the hack right wing judges would hear it .
So If I feel Twitter, X is crap and would tell, argue with anyone I know or can reach that they should not use or advertize on X because of that, I'm illegally conspiraing? 😂😂😂 I thought Elon Musk used to call that free speech...
i just made a x account ,respect elon ,for your courage
Go get em Elon!
Australia has legislation against boycotts too. See COMPETITION AND CONSUMER ACT 2010 - SECT 45D
People 💪 vs government 👎
It's more like rich people vs rich people.
@@GaganSingh-nx2yv The govt is just a company that does what rich people want. They have the money to fund campaigns, they have the money to organize protests, they have the money to hire lobbyists, they pay the bribes, they hire the lawyers.
@@shabadooshabadoo4918 there is no government agency involved. I don't see the relevance of your point.
The laws of the United States are “ODD” you say? Fun. I’m in the USA watching your show? Now that’s odd!
Companies do have the right to choose whom they advertise with, this suit is not about that. It's about creating a cartel outside of the free market to attack another company because you disagree with their views. Thanks
Girlfriend nailed it.
Thanks Elon
How is organizing a boycott illegal?
*Elon Musk:* "Don't advertise. Go fu-- yourself."
*GARM:* _doesn't advertise_
*X:* "Wait, that's illegal!"
No republican should use their products.
No one who cherishes freedom - which starts with freedom on speech should use their products. _The price of freedom, is sometimes your feelings get hurt!_
*(BTW; They were forming a cartel of companies too attack a competitor)*
Ohhhh what an impact it will be for MAGA republicans to boycott Disney...lol. What a joke you guys are.
Republicans love cancel culture 😅
Advertisement where you please free speech Elon is a hypocrite
Who are you
Liz is absolutely right, and this is more about CENSORSHIP. Just remember Mars, Nestle, Cadbury’s etc are all OWNED BY VANGUARD BLACKROCK and SMART STREET
Billionaires are losing power, money and their minds. Weird how these people think they're entitled to other peoples' money.
Elon just got a bonus of 55 billion. Higher ever in history. Did he donate it? No. He is evil like all the other.s
I think that the crux of the argument is that when the companies banded together they form a monopoly, which most countries consider illegal.
Ditto. It's illegal here in New Zealand
Sponsors are allowed to stay and leave when they want to,you can break contracts and give money,but not to already a rich person..waste of money.
Elon Musk has a great case. This is a clear violation of the Rico law. This carries criminal consequence since racketeering is illegal in the USA. Your guest seems to be very stupid when it comes to the topic of companies coordinating to destroy another company. The coordination is called racketeering.
*They were trying to form a cartel of companies too attack a competitor.*
With the help of government three-letter agencies....
x is not a competitor.
@@truth_hearts_1940 Of course it is a threat, but perhaps an enabler may be more concise. It enables people to freely criticize them - making "X" a threat.
Trying is the wrong word.
@@martinrayner6466 you don’t know what the word competitor means. That means they sell a similar product, Twitter doesn’t sell soda or running shoes they’re not a competitor.
Liz Storer is AWESOME.
I think this man, who is a father.is having a great laugh at the expense of those who can't get their heads out of their own arses.Great Guy!!!
Fun Fact: Sky News in the UK is the sister channel of MSNBC in America. That's why it's so $h!t.
Both are part of Comcast Global Media holdings. MSNBC is marketed as a product geared towards Moderates. Sky News is marketed as a product for Right Wingers, not even Conservatives. Comcast does this because they don't care where their dollars come from, so they cover all the markets no matter how base.
Really? Because this Australian division is actually politically to the right of FoxNews. They are closer to One America News, Tucker Carlson, and Bill O'Reily.
Fun fact sky news australia has never delivered one piece of onbective jourlalism, these twats dont think, they just read their bosses script.
From Wikipedia "A cartel is a group of independent market participants who collude with each other as well as agreeing not to compete with each other[1] in order to improve their profits and dominate the market. A cartel is an organization formed by producers to limit competition and increase prices by creating artificial shortages through low production quotas, stockpiling, and marketing quotas." Is there such a thing as a cartel of ideas?
Tampon Timmy and Kooky Kammy
Globalists both of them.
Kamel Toe and Tampon Tim "Harry Bwallz"
Love it !! Tampon Tim..🤣🤣🤣 I have to us it if you don't mind ?
@@serviustullus7204 You are on wrong You Tube video , this is about Musk suing advertisers 😅
Liz is right. If Elon wasn't around we'd be seriously screwed. He put the brakes on the e-commissar, and he's now defending freedom of speech in the UK.
Elon suing advertisers is the crux of hypocrisy he just told them all to F off not that long ago . What happened to free speech and free markets?
Musk is defending his freedom of speech, not yours.
@@John-p7i5g musk is defending the freedom to be racist you just call it speech because it makes you feel better
@@Unmutual-23How so?
@@DG-wo8fx He keeps banning people for speaking against him.
We need Musk to save our country
You need Sharia bro.
Diversity is good for your future bloodline 😊
You need to save yourself 😊
@functionalvanconversion4284 yep
@@functionalvanconversion4284 From what
@@twisteddancer7773 from twisted dancer
Great points on both sides. I think this is how media should be structured. If your news report is bias opinions, then I think they must disclose that this news is for “entertainment only.”
Most people do NOT get their news from ‘X’ Maybe most X users do
🦘 Sky News Australia 🌏 Fair & balanced. Not 🚫 like CNN , MSNBC.
Hey seppo, you seem like a Gen Z using all the Emojis. Do you think you have the capacity for logical debate?
@@EL_Duderino68 How about you actually TRY debating him instead of resorting to ad hominin personal attacks?
@@davidford3115 Sure I'm totally up for that. Maybe you can stand in for him, as he wasn't the one who replied to me.
Is that good with you or are you just going to complain about me (i.e. ad hominem)? Or can you step up and discuss the video. Don't slink away now.
Also, you don't need to add the words personal attack, that's what ad hominem means. :)
I look forward to seeing your knowledge and debating skills.
@@davidford3115 Oh and you can't spell "ad hominem". It's not "ad hominin" (embarrassing)
You go right ahead and show me your debating skills mate. I hope they are better than your literacy skills. Let's go.
Fair and balanced lol. They are more right wing than Fox 😂
Given that Musk said to advertisers not to buy ads on Twitter and to "f__k off", I'm sure this lawsuit will go great.
Love ELON❤
Sky News / foxtel have many many companies that will not spend advertising dollar's with them. Its called protecting your brand and is freedom of choice.
X news is filtered by Elon musk.
sue the hell out of them
Just because Musk has sued someone doesn't mean his case has any merit.
Elon is a WORLD hero! He is fighting for us ALL!
He's a narcissistic sociopath. His daughter, Vivian, called him out as a serial adulterer just today.
I was originally inclined to agree with the guy who says it's their right to say where their money is spent. After looking more deeply into it, I am convinced that these people must be stopped at any cost. These people will bring about a global tyrannical government ran by themselves if we blindly sit back and watch it play out. In fact, they have practically already done so. It's time to revolt against these entities in whatever peaceful way that we can and to require that our governments use force, if necessary, to shut them down.
English common law provides for torts where harm has been caused to another. It is very old and established law.
Is English common law at play here?
Except, the Anglo-world has turned its back on English Common Law holding it in contempt. From Australia during the lockdowns, to New Zealand's hate speech laws targeted at critics of Islam to the US government engaging in lawfare to stifle political opposition, we are FAR from the standards which made English Culture the preeminent culture and justice system in the world. And the world is worse off for it.
@@davidford3115 Do you mean English when you write Anglo? How do you define the word Anglo?
@@davidford3115 At least you got rid of those right-wing nationalist pricks at your last election.
Wait ... this is the same guy who, publicly, on global media, literally told his advertisers "go fuck yourselves," in EXACTLY THOSE WORDS, and is now upset that THEY want nothing to do with HIM?
*Elon Musk:* "Don't advertise. Go fu-- yourself."
*GARM:* _doesn't advertise_
*X:* "Wait, that's illegal!"
yeah, and then he paused to look expectantly at the audience. He clearly was waiting for the applause he so craves. Talk about cringy.
Hu? How is that guy so dumb? He does know you cannot just collude to boycott another company. Ever heard of antitrust law? Amazing you all had a 10 minute conversation about this and clearly nobody even read a single word about what the suit is even about.
Actually not anti-trust. More like racketeering since GARM threatened those companies to drop X.
What companies want shouldn't care when decisions about free speech.
This case is going nowhere
A free market should not be prioritised over free speech.
Actually, the two go hand in hand. This isn't free-market, it is corporate oligarchism, the anthesis of free-markets.
Well, to be fair, Musk is trying to usher in Fascism.
Define facism please
@@ScottWatson-p4w Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/ FASH-iz-əm) is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2][3] characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.[2][3] Opposed to anarchism, democracy, pluralism, egalitarianism, liberalism, socialism, and Marxism,[4][5] fascism is placed on the far-right wing within the traditional left-right spectrum.[6][5][7] Wikipedia
I specifically recall Elon Musk saying that the advertisers could go and “f@#k” themselves if they didn’t want to advertise on twitter (X). I agreed with him then because those companies, as his comment intimated, had a right to advertise wherever they chose. Apparently, their “f@#king” of themselves is now causing him some pain. Financial pain. Hence, the seeming walk back of that comment and the current lawsuit. This one is going to be a good watch. Popcorns to the ready.
You shouldnt have to force or convince anyone to do anything...thats control...and gives those marketers too much power.
I'm on X 🤘 face book is to controlled
Yes, Elon needs to Sue the fuk out of these guys. And win big. Go Go Elon.
You trust in Justice system?
Elon just told advertisers to f themselves not that long ago this lawsuit is the height of hypocrisy
@@consequences5638 Probably not. It's difficult to get real justice these days when you have corrupt, woke judges, all politically driven. I know what you mean.
Today’s social media outlets are like yesterday’s newspapers. We always held dear to the freedom of the press.
Interesting, can’t wait to lean the results.
Good on Mr.Musk
GARM also threatens the advertisers if they don't comply.
Elon is the only one that can save this country !
What a great news outlet sky news is.
Which one?
@@EL_Duderino68 Australia. Which is pretty noteworthy. My experience in Australia was that it had the most oppressive government and local governments of any western country I’ve visited. People are delightful though.
Couldn't have bette man to be on our side. If free speech is limited than it's not freedom of speech anymore. It's not my concern if somebody if triggered cuz he's weak,I won't censor myself.
She’s so intelligent 😍
So he doesn’t understand how the mafia does business. Do what our group says or suffer unpleasant consequences, Capeesh.
I think Caleb Bond is correct and the court case will probably go as he suggests. Unfortunately there is a culture war going on and there are no rules in war. Something that makes war so very terrible.