You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Rare example of progressive outrage being easy to monetize: The current #2 show across all prime-time TV was canceled for an offensive tweet. Picking it up is free money to any network that values viewers over inoffensiveness. @FOXTV?https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/business/media/roseanne-barr-offensive-tweets.html …
Prediction: responders to this tweet will assume I'm taking some normative position about @therealroseanne's tweet, the show, whether to cancel things for being offensive, etc, when all I did was describe a profit opportunity.
"progressive outrage" does not have a neutral connotation, and using that implies that you have a certain level of contempt for them.
Interesting. I'd like to learn more about this. Is it "progressive" or "outrage" that strikes you as biased? What would a more neutral description be, without assuming any conclusions about the controversy, since I'm interested only in the business angle.
It's the phrase because it's close to "liberal outrage," something that a lot of conservatives use to criticise liberals. Hopefully we can agree that what she said was racist? I'm not sure what conclusions you haven't reached yet.
I don't want to discuss the content because I only find the meta-positions interesting, the content is a black hole. And I deeply oppose the insistence that everyone take a position on an outrage before meta-discussing it. That needlessly tribalizes the meta-debate.
Yeah, I deal with that as well. There was an NBER paper posted recently about how low-skilled immigration drove Republicans to vote more, and Twitter discussions kept on devolving. So I understand your frustration on some level.
A good example of profit opportunities often being something to avoid, for your own sake and everyone else’s.
Corporations are profit-maximizing, and there is an audience (Trump voters) who may view this controversy as positive. So it seems unlikely no one will pick up the $100,000 bill on the ground. I'm not saying anything about whether they should, only that they will.
Again, just an argument for viewing the whole process with suspicion. Besides, what you’re saying doesn’t follow, there are ways that reaching for that $100,000 bill exposes risks that don’t exist otherwise.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
