This is going to be a long thread, so strap in, people.
As many know, we started this thing about 17 months ago as a reaction to the bigotry, sexism and propaganda of Breitbart, which was masked as news. We’ve learned a lot since. money.cnn.com/2018/04/01/med…
As many know, we started this thing about 17 months ago as a reaction to the bigotry, sexism and propaganda of Breitbart, which was masked as news. We’ve learned a lot since. money.cnn.com/2018/04/01/med…
For one, we’ve never called for a boycott of any advertiser. We’ve always viewed this as an information campaign. At least online, it is difficult for advertisers to know where they’re appearing. On TV, they know, but are many times unaware of what is said on particular shows.
By informing them of what is said and by whom, they can make up their own decisions. This is not to say that some people can’t disagree with their decisions and point out why, but our view has always been that it is up to them. It’s their money.
Media is incredibly damaged right now. The rise of the hyper partisan “news” has led to some pretty awful shit. Breitbart is one we feel like is off the rails. When you begin to push racism and bigotry to further your ideology, it ceases to be news.
These are businesses. And beyond just pushing an ideology, they’re doing it because it SELLS. Outrage is tremendously profitable & those like Breitbart and, in a lot of cases, Fox sell it by the pound. If this were about free speech, these outlets would be okay with being blogs.
When we, or anyone else, alerts an advertiser about their brand next to an article calling the confederate flag “glorious” or on a show where the host finds it okay to bully a teen mass shooting survivor, we’re expressing our distaste for how ugly things have gotten.
And the best way to express this is by asking advertisers why their spending their money to divide people or bully teenagers. By supporting this behavior, purposely or inadvertently, they’re ensuring that it’s a profitable venture.
They can choose how to react. And we’ve found that the majority of advertisers don’t want to be associated with ugly shit like racism. It’s not good for a brand. They need to appeal to as many people as possible, after all. They’re smart.
Ultimately, these campaigns are votes. Votes for what we, and others, think is acceptable and moral and right in media discourse. They’re really our only way of trying to stem the tide of ugliness.
Hopefully, these campaigns will be replaced by something more holistic, a code of ethics that guides advertisers to support facts and not propaganda and understanding instead of vitriol. Until then, we think it’s the right way to protest.
Thanks for reading that long ass thread.
Thanks for reading that long ass thread.
*theyre. Damn.
