-
swodinsky I think the big companies are where the abuses are the worst and also the more obvious, but taking on small companies being bad in the same way creates opportunities for people to organize more easily and speak up against them and potentially have a happy outcome.On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood -3 🙁
-
swodinsky Reporting on FAANG abuses likely means talking about a bigger problem with more insidious issues, but that also makes it harder to create outcomes and discourages action, whereas--as we can see with folks like CheckMyAdsHQ--starting further down chain can create returns...Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood -3 🙁
-
swodinsky CheckMyAdsHQ And those returns create precedents and those precedents can be used as leverage to hit the big tech cos with reporting that isn't just embarrassing but creates effective action among readers. At least that's my theory...Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood +1 🙂
-
swodinsky CheckMyAdsHQ And stuff at lower level is actually a pretty high impact. Ad fraud protected by bad fraud checking software, agency-employed metrics co.s that fuzz the numbers, bad brand safety, these are all lower level operators than FAANG that have huge impacts.Permalink On twitter.com
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood -10 🙁
-
swodinsky CheckMyAdsHQ Reporting on Google & Facebook is super important and creates change on the long term, but I think that it is supported on a wave created by smaller victories. Previously those have been more political, but I wonder if that is sustainable long term (as opposed to related action)Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood +12 🙂