Netflix Resumes Advertising on X After Elon Musk Controversy::Netflix has resumed advertising on X following a suspension by the streamer and other brands after Elon Musk promoted an antisemitic post.
I am so tired of being so disappointed in companies. Was there ever a time when they weren’t just completely soulless? Is there truly no bottom to their ethics?
In school I had to take Business Ethics. The processor officially renamed the course to Ethical Issues in Business, because, as he explained it in class, business has no ethics, but ethical issues arise all the time. I took it to mean that capitalism destroyed humanity, and those of us that are still left humane must deal with ethical issues in a business (ethicless) setting.
I did not take business classes so limited background but if we assume that the US isn’t going to magically transition away from capitalism, we instead have to find a way to legislate a transition to a more ethical capitalism. That phrase seems to be an oxymoron but for things to not keep getting progressively worse I’m thinking we as a society need to figure out a way to make it happen. Any ideas? You seem to have at least taken a course in the matter.
What if we transition away from capitalism non-magically?
No, let’s not. Or at least let’s change it to something better this time, not worse.
Why don’t you take a list of countries by quality of life from some point in the past decade or two, and see which nations seem to always top it.
Spoiler: they’re the ones with hybrid economies and highly regulated markets.
Yes, capitalist free-market countries almost exclusively. That’s the thing I’d rather not have others break.
Do you not know what a “mixed economy” is? Did you even look at a list? Denmark, Norway, Sweden… You think these are "capitalist free-market countries"and that’s why they top the list?
The reason those countries are at the top of the list for quality of life is because they have regulations on their markets, and robust social safety nets.
Maybe actually do a few minutes of honest, open minded research about quality of life.
I mean that’s probably the preferred path but I can’t see how that realistically happens. There are too many individuals globally with too much to lose that will think their loss of capital is worth bringing down the whole human race. I’m sure they would rather see the world in ashes rather than succeed under an alternate system where they may not be on top.
I think there’s a credible case to be made that moving toward socialism has benefits even for the wealthy, and that the change doesn’t have to be presented as the end of capitalism.
Business really has no ethics, and it needs no ethics: its main and only goal is to make money. Government’s job is to define the ethics, and create and enforce a framework in which businesses may operate.
The reason why businesses shouldn’t be responsible for acting ethically is that being unethical gives you an edge against your competition. So if we let companies have the main responsibility of how to behave, nice companies are penalized.
The framework needs to be as simple and unambiguous as possible, because the more complex it is, the more it penalizes small and starting companies.
The people’s job is to define ethics. The government’s job is to uphold that definition. Governments can’t be expected to define ethics on their own.
And that’s why capitalism is inherently unethical and immoral.
Amoral, more like.
I know what I said…
deleted by creator
(Assuming you aren’t misremembering): That honestly sounds like a really shitty professor.
Ethics are 100% a thing and more people need to improve their intelligence in that regard. What you CAN argue is that morality has no place in business (or engineering (or whatever)). But ethics are not morality or the law.
At this point, I think everyone and their mother is aware of the concept of The Trolley Problem. And… that is pertinent for a reason. Are you going to send the metaphorical train careening into marginalized groups, your workers, your board, or even your family? Or, the inverse of that: Are you going to do something that means you can buy your kids really awesome xmas presents, your board new cars, your workers the nice ramen, or even a moment of lessened horror for trans forlk?
And that ignores the various types of ethics. Even under utilitarianism, there are arguments that you are making a better net good for your board… if only because said marginalized groups suffer so much they will barely notice any relenting.
Improved understanding of what ethics actually are helps to understand WHY good (or more likely) bad things are happening. And it helps those who are in a position to make those decisions to make an intelligent and rational, if not necessarily good, decision.
Back in uni, all the engineering majors were required to take Ethics in Engineering. And it was very obvious who were the libertarian tech bros of the future during that course. But it also, honestly, is the most important course I took in undergrad and the one that has the most use.
And, as a result, when I do recruiting trips/lectures, I tend to cover that topic. I have a nice slide deck of some of the latest horrifying late stage capitalism shit to come out of tech companies as well as whistle blowing stories and I go through it with the students to try to make them think about why they are learning while also finding the people who would be fun to work with or mentor more directly.
I didn’t say ethics had no place in business, nor that ethics wasn’t a thing. I said he renamed it, because business has no ethics. This is the same thing you were saying, but in a lot less words.
I realize words are scary, but maybe read them when you are going to reply to someone? Rather than just assume they must agree with you.
Again, business has ethics. Balancing your fiduciary responsibilities with personal gain (and, in rare instances, societal benefit) is an ethical challenge. Do you choose to strictly follow your contractual/legal responsibilities or do you try to find a way to circumvent that for good or for ill?
Yet again: Ethics are not morality
Yes that is an ethical challenge. But it’s not business. The challenge is how business interacts with that challenge
And that is a distinction without difference
Which… I continue to say that said professor is bad at their jobs. And people who think that matters are the result of that mindset.
Just because you don’t understand the difference doesn’t mean it isn’t there
Lol. Someone woke up on the wrong side of the couch, didn’t they?
What you describe isn’t business ethics, it’s an ethical issues in a business setting. Look, mate. I don’t really care that you may disagree or whether you have or don’t have good reading comprehension. But leave the reddit anger on reddit. Lemmy is for discourse, not for senseless arguments.
Yes. Embracing ignorance and buzz words rather than understanding how the world actually works and what levers and knobs there are and aren’t to work with. THAT is the enlightened standpoint.
Ethics never enter the equation. The highest priority in business is capital, and any company at the level of Netflix follows that maxim religiously. They may be seen following progressive trends, but any good they end up doing only stems from it being profitable to do so.
In other words - no, companies have never not been soulless, and it serves us well to always remember that.
Ethics are a luxury that can be sold like any other, but when times get hard and cuts must be made, ethical companies get devoured by those that are not.
Would Elon be willing to pay high profile companies to advertise on Xitter to entice others back? Of just give them advertising for free? Or… Resume running ads from customers who cancelled just to change public perception?
I’m not saying Netflix isn’t a big enough bag of dicks to start advertising with them again, just contemplating
This might answer some of your questions: https://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-accountability-history-corporations-us/
So Netflix is already shit, guess the shit companies can be shitty together.
A company accused by the far-right of being “too woke” is helping a far-right platform survive, the irony.
Maybe I know nothing about business but why would Netflix even need to advertise there? I’m not even sure they have to advertise at all anymore.
They’re advertising specific shows.
Nazi Boot Camp season 2 premiere, catch it on Netflix!
“Ahh, it’s been a week, no one remembers that ol Elon Musk agreeing with Nazi rhetoric thingy. Let’s spool those ads up again. We’re definitely seeing a return on our marketing budget by advertising on the platform known for being mostly bots!”
If there is a large following of Trump who is regurgitating Nazi rhetoric… it unfortunately makes sense to keep marketing at least here.
If they just want to throw money away on ineffective advertising, they can just send it to me. I have a few ideas that are far more effective than Twat.
Netflix spent about $1.5 billion on advertising in 2022. They could just randomly give a million people +$1000 and probably get better word-of-mouth advertising that way.
Good take. Heck, I’d do it for $100.
That was like what, a whole month or less? Whew, that must’ve been tough on them!
Dammit, Netflix. I can’t cancel my subscription twice.
Good thing my torrent site of choice doesn’t advertise on Xtwitter.
Capitalism. As soon as bad PR is over, it’s back to business.
Pussies.
Yep, I guess it’s time to cancel Netflix.
why do you still have it after all this time
Because they we’re really doing anything bad until now. Raising prices is not a dick move. It’s a private company offering entertainment. They can milk it however they want and I can cancel it when I decide it’s not worth it.
I’d argue it’s not been worth it for a long time. Also raising prices may not be that bad but
limiting your access to only one IP adresspreventing password sharing definitely is a dick move.Well, that’ really depends if you like their content or not, right?
Also, they don’t limit your access to one IP. You can download things on your tablet to watch later and you can stream from different locations when you travel. They really only complain if you stream from two completely different geographical locations at the same time.
Define “different geographical equations”. Can you still share it with a friend? I thought they prevented that.
No, you define “limiting access to one IP”. Because they don’t do that. It’s not the same as preventing password sharing. They can prevent sharing password without limiting IP addresses.
okay preventing password sharing is a dick move then
Always has been.
Why? What did they do before?
They banned password sharing (family account) if everyone doesn’t live in the same location sometime ago.
I don’t see this as a dick move. The rules were clear from the start, they just started enforcing theme. It’s not a bait and switch or something.
Ssh we’re mad at netflix, you’re not supposed to be defending them…
Shm yeah netflix may be scum, but enforcing password sharing policies, which had been part of the EULA from day 1, isn’t scummy.
They marketed 4 streams. Not 4 seats. [And only getting 1 seat 4 times, which is fucking pointless.] That’s a whole different meaning. No one reads the EULA so it doesn’t fucking matter what horse shit Naziflix puts in the fine print.
This is what happens every time youtube has an apocalypse. They stay away long enough to feel like they’ve made their point and then they resume advertising like nothing happened. Maybe it’s not advertisers who hold the power and everyone should stop being so scared of them.
- Capitalism: 192735261625
- Society: 0
Wew, good thing I pirate what I want to see from Netflix!
