ReportWire

Tag: iab-marketing and advertising

  • Tiger Woods Fast Facts | CNN

    Tiger Woods Fast Facts | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Here’s a look at one of the most successful golfers in history, Tiger Woods.

    Birth date: December 30, 1975

    Birth place: Cypress, California

    Birth name: Eldrick Tont Woods

    Father: Earl Woods

    Mother: Kultilda (Punsawad) Woods

    Marriage: Elin Nordegren (October 5, 2004-August 23, 2010, divorced)

    Children: Charlie Axel and Sam Alexis

    Education: Attended Stanford University, 1994-1996

    Won the Masters Tournament five times, the US Open three times, the PGA Championship four times and the British Open three times.

    Woods is the PGA career money list leader.

    With 82 PGA Tour wins, Woods is tied with Sam Snead for most all-time career victories.

    His father nicknamed him “Tiger” after a South Vietnamese soldier with whom he had fought alongside during the Vietnam War.

    1978 – At the age of 2, wins a putting contest with Bob Hope. The match was staged for the “Mike Douglas Show.”

    1980 – Appears on the TV show “That’s Incredible.”

    1991 – Wins his first US Junior Amateur golf championship. At 15 years of age, Woods was the youngest champion in history until 14-year-old Jim Liu broke his record in 2010.

    1992 – Wins his second US Junior Amateur golf championship.

    February 27, 1992 – Competes in his first PGA tournament at the age of 16. He is given a sponsor’s exemption in order to play and is the youngest player ever to play in a PGA tournament at that time.

    1993 – Wins his third US Junior Amateur golf championship.

    1994-1996 – Wins three consecutive US Amateur golf championships.

    August 27, 1996 – Turns professional.

    August 1996 – Signs a five-year endorsement deal with Nike worth $40 million.

    October 6, 1996 – Wins his first tournament as a professional at the Las Vegas Invitational.

    1996 – Forms the Tiger Woods Foundation for the promotion of minority participation in golf and other sports. In February 2018, the charity is renamed TGR Foundation to reflect its growth and scope.

    April 13, 1997 – Wins his first Masters Tournament.

    May 19, 1997 – Signs an endorsement deal with American Express worth between $13 and $30 million.

    June 1997 – Becomes the No. 1 ranked golfer in the world after his 42nd week on the PGA Tour. At 21 years, 24 weeks, he is the youngest player ever to hold the No. 1 spot.

    August 15, 1999 – Wins his first PGA championship.

    June 18, 2000 – Wins his first US Open by 15 strokes, the largest margin in US Open history.

    July 23, 2000 – Wins his first British Open.

    September 14, 2000 – Signs a five-year endorsement contract with Nike. It is worth an estimated $85 million, making it the richest endorsement contract in sports history, at the time.

    June 16, 2002 – Wins his second US Open.

    December 8, 2003 – Named PGA Player of the Year for the fifth straight year.

    May 13, 2005 – Woods fails to make the cut at the Byron Nelson Championship in Irving, Texas. It is the first time since 1998 that Woods is eliminated from a tournament.

    November 23, 2005 – Wins the PGA Grand Slam of Golf for a record-breaking sixth time.

    February 10, 2006 – Opens the Tiger Woods Learning Center in Anaheim, California.

    May 3, 2006 – Woods’ father, Earl Woods, dies of prostate cancer.

    July 23, 2006 – Wins his third British Open.

    August 20, 2006 – Wins his third PGA Championship.

    August 12, 2007 – Wins his fourth PGA Championship.

    April 15, 2008 – Undergoes arthroscopic surgery on his left knee. He had two prior surgeries on the same knee, first in 1994 to remove a benign tumor, and another arthroscopic surgery in December 2002.

    June 16, 2008 – Wins the US Open in sudden death, defeating Rocco Mediate.

    June 18, 2008 – Woods announces that he will undergo reconstructive anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery on his left knee and will miss the remainder of the PGA tour season.

    February 26, 2009 – After an eight-month hiatus from golf due to knee surgery, Woods plays the second round of the World Golf Championships Match Play and loses to Tim Clark.

    November 15, 2009 – Wins the Australian Masters.

    November 27, 2009 – Is taken to a hospital after being injured in a car accident in front of his home in Florida. He is released later the same day.

    December 2, 2009 – Woods apologizes for “transgressions” that let his family down – the same day a gossip magazine publishes a report alleging he had an affair. He does not admit to an affair and offers no details about the “transgressions” in his statement.

    February 19, 2010 – Makes a televised statement apologizing for being unfaithful to his wife and letting down both fans and family. “I had affairs, I cheated. What I did was not acceptable, and I am the only person to blame,” he says. Responding to rumors, Woods says that his wife never hit him, as some media reported in connection with the car crash on November 27, 2009, and that there has “never been an episode of domestic violence” in his relationship with his wife. Woods also says that he entered a rehabilitation center for 45 days, from the end of December to early February, and that he will continue to receive treatment and therapy.

    October 31, 2010 – After 281 straight weeks, the longest in Official World Golf Ranking history, Woods loses his No. 1 ranking to Lee Westwood.

    2010 – Loses about $20 million from estimated endorsements after sponsors including Gatorade, AT&T and Accenture end ties. Other sponsors including Nike, Upper Deck and EA Sports remain with Woods.

    June 7, 2011 – Announces he will miss the US Open due to knee and Achilles tendon injuries.

    July 19, 2011 – Woods announces that after a 12-year relationship, he and caddie Steve Williams will no longer be working together.

    August 4, 2011 – Returns to golf at the Bridgestone Invitational, after a nearly three-month break.

    August 11, 2011 – Plays one of his worst first rounds of golf in a major championship. He fails to make the cut at the PGA Championship for the first time in his career.

    October 3, 2011 – For the first time in 15 years, Woods does not make it onto golf’s top 50 players list, according to the official World Golf Ranking.

    October 5, 2011 – Signs a new endorsement deal with Swiss watch-maker Rolex.

    March 25, 2012 – Earns his first PGA Tour win since September 2009, in the Arnold Palmer Invitational in Orlando.

    June 3, 2012 – With his win at the Memorial Tournament, ties Jack Nicklaus with 73 PGA Tour victories.

    July 2, 2012 – Beats Nicklaus’ PGA Tour record with the AT&T National win. Woods’ 74th PGA Tour win ranks him in second place on the all-time list.

    September 3, 2012 – Becomes the first PGA tour participant to earn $100 million.

    March 25, 2013 – Woods wins the Arnold Palmer Invitational for the eighth time, and regains the No. 1 spot.

    March 31, 2014 – Woods undergoes back surgery for a pinched nerve.

    August 23, 2015 – Posts a top 10 finish at his debut at the Wyndham Championships but ends his season as the 257th ranked player in the world. His finish was four shots off eventual winner Davis Love III. Woods has now missed the cut for three majors in a row.

    December 1, 2015 – Announces that he underwent his third microdiscectomy surgery last month – a procedure to remove bone around a pinched nerve to allow space for it to heal – and admits he has no idea when he will be back on the course.

    July 20, 2016 – It is announced that Woods will miss the PGA Championship due to his continued recovery from back surgery. This marks the first time in his career that he has missed all four major championships.

    December 4, 2016 – Woods finishes 14 shots behind the winner in the Hero World Challenge, his first competitive event in more than a year.

    May 29, 2017 – Woods is arrested on suspicion of DUI in Jupiter, Florida. He says in a statement that he had “an unexpected reaction to prescribed medications” and that alcohol was not involved.

    June 19, 2017 – Woods announces that he is receiving professional help to manage medication for back pain and a sleep disorder.

    July 3, 2017 – Announces that he has completed an intensive program for managing his medications.

    October 27, 2017 – Woods pleads guilty to reckless driving. His 12-month probation is contingent on completing any recommended treatment including DUI school, 50 hours of community services and random drug and alcohol testing.

    December 3, 2017 – Making his long-awaited return from a fourth back surgery – his first tournament for 301 days since pulling out of the Dubai Desert Classic in February – Woods finishes in a tie for ninth place in the Hero World Challenge tournament in the Bahamas.

    September 23, 2018 – Wins the Tour Championship at Atlanta’s East Lake Golf Club, for his first PGA Tour victory since August 2013 and his 80th overall.

    April 14, 2019 – Wins his fifth Masters and 15th major title.

    May 6, 2019 – President Donald Trump presents Woods with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor, during a White House ceremony.

    October 27, 2019 – Wins his record-equaling 82nd PGA Tour title at the Zozo Championship in Chiba, Japan. Woods is tied with legendary golfer Sam Snead, who won 82 titles throughout his more than 50-year career.

    May 24, 2020 – Woods and Peyton Manning defeat Phil Mickelson and Tom Brady by one stroke in “The Match: Champions for Charity” golf tournament at the Medalist Golf Club in Hobe Sound, Florida. The event raises over $20 million for coronavirus relief efforts and captures an average of 5.8 million viewers to become the most-watched golf telecast in the history of cable television.

    February 23, 2021 – Woods is hospitalized after a serious one-car rollover accident in Los Angeles County, according to the LA County Sheriff’s Department. Wood’s agent Mark Steinberg said the golfer suffered “multiple leg injuries” and was in surgery following the accident. The next day, Woods is “awake, responsive, and recovering” in the hospital after emergency surgery on his lower right leg and ankle at the Harbor-UCLA Medical Center. The leg fractures were “comminuted,” meaning the bone was broken into more than two parts, and “open,” meaning the broken bone was exposed to open air, creating risk of an infection, Chief Medical Officer Dr. Anish Mahajan says in the statement.

    November 29, 2021 – In an exclusive interview published in Golf Digest, Tiger Woods speaks publicly about his golfing future for the first time since his car crash. “I think something that is realistic is playing the tour one day, never full time, ever again, but pick and choose, just like Mr. (Ben) Hogan did,” Woods tells interviewer Henni Koyack.

    March 9, 2022 – Woods is inducted into the World Golf Hall of Fame at the PGA Tour headquarters in Florida.

    April 7, 2022 – Tees off in the first round of the Masters, his first tournament in 14 months, completing a remarkable comeback after sustaining serious leg injuries in his February 2021 car crash.

    October 2022 – Erica Herman, a former girlfriend of Woods, files a complaint in Martin County, Florida after their six-year relationship comes to end. Herman alleges a trust owned by Woods violated the Florida Residential Landlord Tenant Act by breaking the oral tenancy agreement. On March 6, 2023, Herman files a second complaint aimed at nullifying the NDA she signed in 2017. On May 17, 2023, a Florida judge rules against Herman, calling her claims that the NDA is invalid and unenforceable “implausibly pled.” In June 2023, Herman drops her lawsuit alleging a trust owned by Woods violated the Florida Residential Landlord Tenant Act. In November 2023, Herman drops her appeal to nullify the NDA.

    April 19, 2023 – Announces he has completed “successful” surgery on his ankle following his withdrawal from The Masters earlier this month.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Burgers and tacos don’t look like they do in ads. Lawsuits are trying to change that | CNN Business

    Burgers and tacos don’t look like they do in ads. Lawsuits are trying to change that | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    When it comes to food advertising, what you see is rarely what you get. A flurry of recent lawsuits wants to change that.

    Over the past few years, lawyers have been bringing class action suits against fast food companies, alleging that they’re misrepresenting food in their marketing.

    Lawyers James Kelly and Anthony Russo, in particular, have been leading the charge, bringing cases against Taco Bell, Wendy’s, McDonald’s, Burger King and Arby’s. These companies use ads that don’t match up with their actual food, the suits allege.

    As evidence, the complaints feature images of food marketing alongside shots of their real-life counterparts. In the ads, burgers look tall, heaped with meat and cheese, topped with golden, rounded buns. But in the photos of burgers bought from a real fast food location, they’re flat, with meat and cheese barely peeking out of limp, white buns. Tacos are no different: In Taco Bell’s ads, Crunchwraps look hearty and plump. In photos in the lawsuit, they look flat and nearly empty. The suits are ongoing.

    “We saw a record number of food litigation lawsuits filed from 2020 to 2023, with hundreds of new suits every year,” said Tommy Tobin, a lawyer at Perkins Coie and Lecturer at UCLA Law, adding that “food litigation is a fast-growing area of law.”

    The explosion has been largely driven by the efforts of a handful of lawyers, including Russo and Kelly, said Bonnie Patten, executive director of Truth in Advertising, a nonprofit organization that focuses on protecting consumers from false advertising.

    Their cases focus on quantity, she said, essentially arguing that food in ads appears more bountiful than what customers actually get. Other lawyers, like Spencer Sheehan, focus on how food is described. Sheehan, a New York lawyer, has filed hundreds of class action suits focusing on misleading words on packaged foods — like use of the word “vanilla” on foods made with little or no actual vanilla.

    Major chains have also been targeted for how they describe food. Last year a class action suit was brought against Starbucks claiming that the chain is misleading buyers of its “Refreshers” beverages by naming them for ingredients they don’t have. The complaint states that, for example, “the Mango Dragonfruit and Mango Dragonfruit Lemonade Refreshers contain no mango,” and that in fact “all of the products are predominantly made with water, grape juice concentrate, and sugar.” Starbucks argued, among other things, that the fruits mentioned indicate a flavor rather than an ingredient.

    “The allegations in the complaint are inaccurate and without merit,” a Starbucks spokesperson said in a statement, adding, “we look forward to defending ourselves against these claims.”

    For a judge or jury to side with the plaintiffs in false advertising claims, lawyers have to successfully make the case that the ads would trick a “reasonable consumer,” Tobin, explained.

    “Under this standard, a court asks whether a reasonable consumer would be misled by the product’s marketing or labeling,” he said.

    The courts will have to draw the line between false advertising and just, well, advertising — which might be trickier than it sounds.

    Burger King, in a bid to dismiss the lawsuit against it, argued that its ads are fair.

    “Reasonable consumers viewing food advertising know” that food in ads “has been styled to make it look as appetizing as possible,” Burger King argued in a recent filing. That “innate” knowledge, plus the fact that a Whopper patty is always made with a quarter pound of beef, as promised, means that the ads are fine, according to Burger King.

    “The plaintiffs’ claims are false,” a Burger King spokesperson said in a statement about the lawsuit. “The flame-grilled beef patties portrayed in our advertising are the same patties used in the millions of Whopper sandwiches we serve to guests nationwide.” Arby’s, McDonald’s, and Taco Bell did not respond to requests for comment. Wendy’s declined to comment, citing the ongoing litigation.

    Lawsuits claim that burgers from McDonald's, Burger King and Wendy's don't look as they appear in ads.

    For Russo, that argument doesn’t cut it. He’s more concerned with what he calls the “common-sense eyeball test.” The fast food chains targeted in his suit, he said, are failing.

    “If you look at what their advertisements are showing, and you look at what on a regular basis, every consumer is getting … [there’s] a glaring disparity,” he said. “You could talk about weight … you could talk about volume, those are all the things the experts get into,” he said. But if the image is drastically different from the product, he argues, those details don’t matter.

    In the Burger King case, a judge recently agreed to punt the question of what is “reasonable” to a jury, refusing to dismiss the case in full as Burger King requested.

    Starbucks will also have to face many of the claims brought against it in the class action. “Plaintiffs have adequately alleged that a significant portion of the general consuming public could be misled by the names of the at-issue beverages,” a recent order states.

    For Patten, a reasonable consumer is an “average consumer.” The legal system, she said, often expect more from a reasonable consumer than she would from an average one.

    “Trial courts tend to have a very high opinion of who the reasonable consumer is,” she said. “And I think as a result of that, will dismiss a lot of these types of class actions, taking the position that the reasonable consumer of course knows that this type of advertising exaggerates the quality and quantity of food.”

    But Patten has heard from many complaining about this specific discrepancy, between how much food they expect due to advertising, and how much food they actually get.

    “We get it for burgers, we’ve gotten it for buckets of chicken, all sorts of different kinds of fast food,” she said.

    When it comes to allegations of false advertising, there are more egregious questions than whether a taco on the screen matches a taco in the hand. And Patten’s not convinced that class actions are the way to go — if they’re not dismissed, they often get settled, offering the defendant certain protections and giving consumers a small sum of cash, while their lawyers walk away with a larger bundle.

    But with people watching their budgets, it’s worth examining whether customers are getting as much food as they expect from major fast food chains.

    When people are “using their limited resources to purchase this, and then they’re not being provided with the quantity of food they’re expecting — that is an issue, no doubt.”

    The suits, and the attention they’ve received, can help inform the public of what to really expect, Patten said.

    They “can help educate consumers and make more savvy purchasers of their dinners,” she said. “The best defense against deceptive marketing is an educated consumer.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s X Corp. sues California AG over content moderation law | CNN Business

    Elon Musk’s X Corp. sues California AG over content moderation law | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Elon Musk’s X Corp., the parent company of the platform formerly known as Twitter, on Friday sued California’s attorney general over the state’s new content moderation law.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed bill AB 587 into law last September. The law requires social media companies to post their terms of service online and submit a semiannual report to the state attorney general outlining their content moderation policies and practices. Platforms must, among other things, disclose how their automated content moderation systems work, how they define controversial content categories such as “hate speech” and “disinformation,” and the number of pieces of content flagged or removed in such categories.

    Newsom’s office touted the bill as a way to improve transparency from social networks. But in a complaint filed in California’s Eastern District Court against California Attorney General Robert Bonta, X alleged that the law violates the First Amendment and California’s constitution by potentially compelling the company to moderate users’ politically charged speech.

    The law “compels companies like X Corp. to engage in speech against their will, impermissibly interferes with the constitutionally-protected editorial judgments of companies such as X Corp., has both the purpose and likely effect of pressuring companies such as X Corp. to remove, demonetize, or deprioritize constitutionally-protected speech,” the company alleged in the complaint. It added that the law could place an “undue burden” on social media companies such as Musk’s X, which is headquartered in California.

    Attorney General Bonta’s press office said in an email to CNN: “While we have not yet been served with the complaint, we will review it and respond in court.”

    A spokesperson for Newsom sent CNN a statement from last September in which the governor remarked on the bill.

    “California will not stand by as social media is weaponized to spread hate and disinformation that threaten our communities and foundational values as a country,” Newsom said in the statement. “Californians deserve to know how these platforms are impacting our public discourse, and this action brings much-needed transparency and accountability to the policies that shape the social media content we consume every day.”

    The lawsuit comes as Musk has escalated his rhetoric over what kinds of speech should be permitted on his platform, as the company’s core advertising business has taken a major revenue hit over concerns, among other things, about the approach to content moderation. Under Musk’s leadership, the platform has made several changes to its content policies, including ceasing enforcement of its Covid-19 misinformation policy and reinstating many previously banned users.

    Just last month, at least two brands paused their ad spending on X after their advertisements ran alongside an account promoting Nazism. (X suspended the account after the issue was flagged and said ad impressions on the page were minimal.)

    The billionaire this week threatened a lawsuit against the Anti-Defamation League for defamation, claiming that the nonprofit organization’s statements about rising hate speech on the social media platform have torpedoed X’s advertising revenue. (The ADL says it does not comment on legal threats, but CEO Jonathan Greenblatt spoke out against the #BanTheADL campaign on X.)

    In Friday’s lawsuit, X Corp. alleged that requiring social media companies to report their moderation practices could pressure the platforms into “limiting or censoring constitutionally-protected content that the State finds objectionable.” It also claimed that the law could force social platforms “to take public positions on controversial and politically charged issues” and thus tailor those positions in a way it otherwise wouldn’t to avoid public scrutiny.

    The law “‘compel[s]’ X Corp. to ‘speak a particular message,’ which necessarily ‘alters the content of’ its speech,’” in violation of its First Amendment rights, the company alleges in the complaint.

    The lawsuit seeks a jury trial on the constitutionality and legal validity of the California law.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Google is laying off hundreds in its recruitment division | CNN Business

    Google is laying off hundreds in its recruitment division | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Google confirmed it will lay off hundreds of staff members who helped recruit and hire employees, as Silicon Valley continues its cost-cutting efforts.

    The latest cuts come after Google parent Alphabet in January eliminated 12,000 jobs, or about 6% of its workforce, across the company as it grappled with economic uncertainty that hit the company’s bottom line last year, especially its core advertising business.

    During Google’s July earnings call, CEO Sundar Pichai said the company was continuing to slow its “expense growth and pace of hiring.”

    “We continue to invest in top engineering and technical talent while also meaningfully slowing the pace of our overall hiring,” Google spokesperson Courtenay Mencini said in a statement Wednesday, adding that the workload for recruiters has declined as hiring slows. “To ensure we operate efficiently, we’ve made the hard decision to reduce the size of our recruiting team.”

    The layoffs were earlier reported by Semafor and CNBC.

    The cuts will affect a few hundred members of Google’s recruiting organization globally; most of the team will remain and continue hiring for critical roles such as top engineering talent, according to Google. The company did not specify the exact number of layoffs in the department.

    Google also said the recruiting cuts are not part of any wider layoffs, and that affected employees will be supported with severance offers and other benefits.

    Some Google recruiters for the company’s cloud, user experience, software engineering and other teams posted on LinkedIn, noting they had been affected by the layoffs.

    “My heart is heavy for everyone that was impacted alongside me, and I know better days are ahead for all of us as much as today doesn’t feel like it,” one affected Google recruiter wrote.

    Alphabet grew its workforce by more than 50,000 employees starting in 2021 as booming demand for its services during the pandemic boosted profits. But last year, the company’s core digital ad business slowed as fears of an economic downturn or a recession caused advertisers to pull back their spending.

    This year, the company has emphasized its efforts to cut costs as it works to stabilize its business. Google in July said its profits had grown nearly 15% year-over-year in the quarter ended in June, as the company’s Search and YouTube ads businesses continued to recover.

    As of the end of 2022, Alphabet had 190,234 employees, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. By the end of June, its headcount had fallen to 181,798, according to its most recent filing.

    A wide range of other tech companies also made major layoffs this year as they attempt to cut costs amid economic challenges, including Meta, Microsoft and, more recently, T-Mobile.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meta considers paid subscription in EU for users to bypass targeted ads | CNN Business

    Meta considers paid subscription in EU for users to bypass targeted ads | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Instagram and Facebook users in the European Union may soon be able to opt out of targeted ads if they pay for a monthly subscription.

    A source familiar with the matter told CNN that Meta is evaluating a range of options to comply with multiple European regulations aimed at curbing US technology companies’ use of personalized ads. Over the last year, the EU has tightened regulations and will require big tech companies to ask users for their consent around such advertising.

    In July, a court ruled tech companies could use subscription models as a way of offering such consent, including asking users if they want to access Facebook and Instagram without advertising, for a fee.

    Under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), companies may collect and use the personal data of EU citizens so long as the usage falls into certain disclosed categories. Meta has previously argued that its data collection for advertising is needed for fulfilling the “contracts” between the platform and end users to provide service. But privacy advocates and regulators have said that justification doesn’t support the use of personal data for advertising.

    CNN’s source said Meta remains in close discussions with its lead regulator in Europe, the Irish Data Protection Commission, about a compliance solution. The plans, if implemented, would not apply to users outside of Europe.

    The Wall Street Journal recently reported Meta aims to charge about $14 a month to users who want to bypass targeted ads on Instagram on their phones and $17 to access both Facebook and Instagram without ads, to comply with EU regulations.

    A spokesperson for Meta declined to comment on the possibility of rolling out a subscription plan but echoed that it is looking at all options.

    “Meta believes in the value of free services which are supported by personalized ads,” the company said in a statement. “However, we continue to explore options to ensure we comply with evolving regulatory requirements. We have nothing further to share at this time.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ADL says it will resume advertising on X following feud with Elon Musk | CNN Business

    ADL says it will resume advertising on X following feud with Elon Musk | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    The Anti-Defamation League on Wednesday said it plans to resume advertising on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, following a spat with owner Elon Musk.

    Musk last month threatened to sue the ADL for defamation, claiming that the nonprofit organization’s statements about rising hate speech on the social media platform had hurt X’s advertising revenue. ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt pushed back on the claims, saying that while the ADL was part of a coalition of groups that called on companies to pause advertising on the platform immediately following Musk’s acquisition last year, it had not been engaged in such calls in recent months.

    Musk’s statements about the group also amplified a campaign of antisemitic hate against the organization that had begun prior to Musk’s legal threat, leading to a surge of threats directed at the ADL, Greenblatt told CNN last month.

    The rights group reiterated in a statement Wednesday that “any allegation that ADL has somehow orchestrated a boycott of X or caused billions of dollars of losses to the company or is ‘pulling the strings’ for other advertisers is false.”

    “Indeed, we ourselves were advertising on the platform until the anti-ADL attacks began a few weeks ago,” the group said. “We now are preparing to do so again to bring our important message on fighting hate to X and its users.”

    Musk responded to the ADL’s statement in a post Wednesday saying, “Thank you for clarifying that you support advertising on X.”

    The statement appears to mark a resolution — for now — to weekslong tension between Musk and the ADL, which has coincided with incidents of antisemitism rising across the United States. But the group says it will continue to monitor for antisemitic content on X.

    “As we have noted in our research over the past several years, X – along with other social media platforms — has a serious issue with antisemites and other extremists using these platforms to push their hateful ideas and, in some cases, bully Jewish and other users,” it said. “A better, healthier, and safer X would be a win for the world … As we do with all platforms, we will credit X as it moves in that direction, and we also will call it out when it has not.”

    The ADL and other similar organizations, including the Center for Countering Digital Hate, have said in reports that the volume of hate speech on the website has grown dramatically under Musk’s stewardship. (Musk has criticized the findings.)

    Two brands in August paused their ad spending on X after their advertisements ran alongside an account promoting Nazism. X suspended the account after the issue was flagged and said ad impressions on the page were minimal.

    X has emphasized its new “freedom of speech, not freedom of reach” policy that aims to limit the reach of so-called lawful but awful content on the platform and to protect brands from having their ads appear alongside such content. CEO Linda Yaccarino has also promoted additional brand safety controls for advertisers, including the ability to avoid having their ads show next to “targeted hate speech, sexual content, gratuitous gore, excessive profanity, obscenity, spam, [and] drugs.”

    Asked about Musk’s threats to sue the ADL in an interview last week, Yaccarino said, “I wish that would be different … We’re looking into that.” She added that the ADL should acknowledge X’s progress on addressing antisemitism.

    It appears the platform may have more work to do. A search on Wednesday for Greenblatt’s name immediately surfaced multiple hateful and antisemitic tweets about the ADL leader.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • X is ‘close to breakeven’ says CEO Linda Yaccarino | CNN Business

    X is ‘close to breakeven’ says CEO Linda Yaccarino | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    X CEO Linda Yaccarino, leader of the platform formerly known as Twitter, said the company is keeping an eye on new competitor Threads, despite the sharply slowing growth of the rival app from Meta.

    “Threads did jump in with a ton of hype and a launch pad from their Instagram users … [but] it’s dropped off dramatically,” Yaccarino told CNBC Thursday in her first interview as CEO of the company now called X.

    “But you can never, ever take your eye off any competition because they’ll continue iterating and as much as the launch has stalled, we’re keeping an eye on everything that they’re doing.”

    Still, Yaccarino said X remains largely focused on its own future as the company chases profitability, and that Threads may be looking at its past.

    “What we can see is that [Threads] may be building to what Twitter was — enter rebrand, enter X — and we’re focused on what X will be, and it’s an entirely different roadmap and vision,” she said.

    Staving off competition from Meta’s Threads and other rival platforms is just one of the things Yaccarino is now tasked with after taking over from owner Elon Musk as X’s CEO in June. In just her first two months, the company underwent a massive rebrand from Twitter to X in hopes of transforming into an “everything app” similar to China’s WeChat, and has continued to warn of challenges reviving its core advertising business. Musk, who is now the company’s chief technology officer, has also been preparing for a cage fight with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

    Yaccarino joined the company after months of turmoil caused by Musk’s takeover, including mass layoffs, controversial policy decisions and various legal battles.

    But on Thursday, she doubled down on the company’s vision and explained why it retired its highly recognized brand name.

    “The rebrand really represented a liberation from Twitter, a liberation that allows us to evolve past a legacy mindset and to reimagine how everyone … around the world is going to change how we congregate, how we transact, all in one place,” Yaccarino said, adding that users would soon be able to make video calls and payments through the platform.

    “It’s developing into this global town square that is fueled by free expression, where the public gathers in real time,” she said.

    Yaccarino said that the company is returning to growth mode after months of slashing costs through ongoing layoffs, infrastructure and office space reductions and, in some cases, allegedly holding back on paying its bills and employee severance. Twitter’s staff has shrunk from nearly 8,000 employees to just around 1,500 workers since Musk’s takeover, Yaccarino said.

    “Are we hiring? Yes,” Yaccarino said. “I get to come in and shift from this cost discipline to growth … the future is bright.”

    Threatening to stand in the way of that evolution are the company’s very real business challenges. Musk last month disclosed in a post that, due to a 50% drop in advertising revenue and a “heavy debt load,” the platform is still losing money. After Musk bought Twitter for $44 billion last October, the company’s value now stands around $15 billion, according to a May disclosure from a Fidelity fund.

    Yaccarino, a former marketing executive with NBCUniversal, was brought on to Twitter in part to help revive its advertising business. And she said on Thursday that the company is “close to breakeven.”

    “Coca Cola, Visa, State Farm is a huge partner, they’re coming back — the last bunch of weeks, continued revenue growth,” Yaccarino said.

    But maintaining the ad business has been an uphill battle for the site since Musk’s takeover. Hordes of advertisers halted spending on the platform over concerns about content moderation, mass layoffs and general uncertainty about the company’s future. Musk has also defended his own controversial tweets, telling CNBC in May, “I’ll say what I want, and if the consequence of that is losing money, so be it.”

    Yaccarino pointed to the company’s “freedom of speech, not freedom of reach” policy that aims to limit the reach of so-called lawful but awful content on the platform and to protect brands from having their ads appear alongside such content. X on Tuesday rolled out additional brand safety controls for advertisers, including the ability to avoid having their ads show next to “targeted hate speech, sexual content, gratuitous gore, excessive profanity, obscenity, spam, drugs.”

    “I wrap my security blanket around you, my brand and my CMO, and say your ads will only air next to content that is appropriate for you,” Yaccarino said Thursday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Two brands suspend advertising on X after their ads appeared next to pro-Nazi content | CNN Business

    Two brands suspend advertising on X after their ads appeared next to pro-Nazi content | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    At least two brands have said they will suspend advertising on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, after their ads and those of other companies were run on an account promoting fascism. The issue came less than a week after X CEO Linda Yaccarino publicly affirmed the company’s commitment to brand safety for advertisers.

    The nonprofit news watchdog Media Matters for America documented in a report published Wednesday that ads for a host of mainstream brands have been run on the account, which has shared content celebrating Hitler and the Nazi Party.

    Ads for brands including Adobe, Gilead Sciences, the University of Maryland’s football team, New York University Langone Hospital and NCTA-The Internet and Television Association were run alongside tweets from the account that had garnered hundreds of thousands of views, CNN observed.

    Spokespeople for NCTA and pharmaceutical company Gilead said that they immediately paused their ad spending on X after CNN flagged their ads on the pro-Nazi account.

    “We take the responsible placement of NCTA ads very seriously and are concerned that our post about the future of broadband technology appeared next to this highly disturbing content,” NCTA spokesperson Brian Dietz said in a statement, adding that the organization had opted into X’s brand safety measures including keyword restrictions and limiting its ad placement to the “home feed of target audiences.”

    “Brand safety will remain an utmost priority for NCTA, which means suspending advertising on Twitter/X for the foreseeable future and heavily limiting NCTA’s organic presence on the platform,” Dietz said.

    A spokesperson for Gilead said the company will pause its ad spending while X investigates the issue.

    Jason Yellin, University of Maryland’s associate athletic director, expressed concern about the placement of the football team’s post on the account and said Maryland Football has not spent money on advertising on X since 2021, meaning X may have promoted the post despite it not being a paid ad.

    A spokesperson for NYU Langone said in a statement that the hospital was “completely surprised by this and are extremely concerned with any appearance of our advertising and brand next to obviously objectionable content that promotes hatred,” adding that it expects its advertising partners to “act responsibly.”

    X did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CNN. Hours after the Media Matters report was published Wednesday morning and CNN observed additional brands’ ads running on the account, the account appeared to be suspended.

    Adobe did not immediately respond to requests for comment from CNN.

    The issue comes as X has been trying to lure advertisers back to the platform after many left in the wake of Elon Musk’s takeover of the company last fall over concerns about content moderation, mass layoffs and general uncertainty over the platform’s direction. Musk said last month that the company still had negative cash flow because of a nearly 50% drop in its core advertising revenue.

    Yaccarino — who joined the company in June, just ahead of a major rebrand from Twitter to X — told CNBC in her first public interview as chief executive last week that many of the platform’s advertisers have returned and that the company is “close to break-even.” She touted the company’s “freedom of speech, not freedom of reach” policy, which aims to limit the reach of so-called lawful but awful content on the platform and to protect brands from having their ads appear alongside such content.

    X last week said it had rolled out additional brand safety controls for advertisers, including the ability to avoid having their ads show next to “targeted hate speech, sexual content, gratuitous gore, excessive profanity, obscenity, spam, drugs.” In addition to human content moderation reviewers that monitor for content that violates the platform’s rules, X says it has automated software that determines where and how ads are placed on the platform.

    “Your ads will only air next to content that is appropriate for you,” Yaccarino said during last week’s interview.

    But Wednesday’s report suggests that the company still has work to do if it wants to avoid monetizing, and placing ads alongside, objectionable content. “Media Matters and other observers have documented how X has remained a dangerous cesspool of content, especially for advertisers,” Wednesday’s report states. Media Matters says it has also documented instances of brands’ ads being placed next to content from Holocaust denial and white nationalist accounts.

    While she did not publicly comment on the ads appearing alongside pro-Nazi content, Yaccarino did post on X Wednesday that, “Sensitivity Settings is live globally in the X Ads Manager — making it even simpler for all advertisers to find the right balance between reach and suitability.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meta criticized for making reproductive health an R-rated issue | CNN Business

    Meta criticized for making reproductive health an R-rated issue | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Female reproductive health experts are calling on Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, to rethink its restrictions on reproductive health content.

    The company has long faced criticism for removing and restricting female reproductive health information with a prominent report from the Center for Intimacy Justice early last year accusing Meta of systematically rejecting many female and gender diverse reproductive health ads. The CIJ report also accused Meta of having bias algorithms, stating that male reproductive health ads were found to be permitted, including ads that referenced male sexual pleasure.

    In bid to combat those concerns, Meta tweaked its “adult products or services” advertising policy last October to include clearer guidelines about reproductive health, clarifying that it allows the promotion of “reproductive health products or services” if the content is targeted to “people aged 18 or older.”

    Meta

    (FB)     argues the topic is sensitive, stating that as a global company it needs to take in to account the “wide array of people from different cultures and countries” to “avoid potential negative experiences.”

    However, female reproductive experts tell CNN that the advertising policy is still too restrictive and is creating barriers for how younger people around the world access information about female reproductive health issues, including the menstrual cycle, which can start as early as 8 years old.

    They argue that censoring content about normal and natural bodily functions plays into the shame that has long plagued how people learn about the female body and hormone cycle. That can hinder how people with uteruses advocate for their bodies in healthcare settings, including obtaining care for misunderstood and underdiagnosed conditions like endometriosis.

    The practice of censoring female reproductive health content is not unique to Meta, with similar issues reported on other social media platforms. However, Meta is under specific scrutiny for failing to adequately address the issue within its policy updates last year.

    The founder and CEO of the Center for Intimacy Justice, Jackie Rotman, told CNN that despite the policy update, Meta’s algorithms still seem to have a problem with female reproductive health content.

    “The policy says that reproductive health is allowed, but in practice their technology is still rejecting it,” Rotman said, explaining that images of uteruses are often mistakenly flagged as nudity, and words like period, menopause, endometriosis and vagina also commonly triggering sexually inappropriate warnings.

    Rotman outlined that while Meta’s reproductive health guidelines are targeted toward advertising content, unpaid posts are also often being impacted by Meta’s algorithms. She says shadow-banning, which refers to content being partially blocked from certain audiences, is common practice for organic content. Several reproductive health content creators told CNN that they experience shadow-banning, explaining that it is time consuming game of trial and error to determine what is considered too taboo.

    Dr. Hazel Wallace, author of “The Female Factor” told CNN she wishes she could be more direct in how she speaks about the female body and hormone cycle, including menstrual health. However, said has learned that “to educate people, you almost have to play the game.”

    She says she often experiences shadow banning, with her analytics showing less engagement if she uses words like period. She explained that her team experimented with Meta’s algorithm, finding they could often dodge restrictions by mis-spelling the word period as p3riod.

    “We found that it increased engagement because it doesn’t flag your content as being inappropriate to certain audiences,” Wallace outlined.

    While Meta on several occasions has apologized and re-instated female reproductive health content that it says was mistakenly removed, it still stipulates an age restriction in its policy. Therefore, even if the updated policy was perfectly implemented, Meta would still be green lighting the practise of censoring crucial content from certain audiences.

    CNN asked Meta about the reports that it is continuing to remove, restrict, and shadow-ban female reproductive health content. CNN also asked Meta why all female reproductive health, including menstrual health, is classified as an 18+ issue.

    In response, a spokesperson for Meta, Ryan Daniels, said, “We welcome ads for women’s health and sexual wellness products, but we prohibit nudity and have specific rules about how these products can be marketed on our platform.”

    In a bid to change the conversation, female reproductive health content creators are not letting Meta’s restrictions silence their voices.

    Wallace, a like so many others in her field, says she should not need to self-censor how she speaks about female reproductive health, arguing that censorship perpetuates a “hush hush” narrative about “normal experiences.”

    “Imagine a world where we are teaching young girls and women from puberty – this is what to expect, this is normal, this is not normal, this is when to ask for help. We would feel a lot more empowered,” Wallace stated.

    Categorizing reproductive health as an R-rated topic is an issue that extends far beyond Meta advertising policies, reflecting wider societal views, from politics to sex education curriculums.

    Tracey Lindeman, the author of “BLEED: Destroying Myths and Misogyny in Endometriosis,” says classifying all female reproductive health issues under the umbrella of sexual health “perpetuates the idea that our sexual organs are to be exploited and used for sexuality, even at a young age.”

    “You’re born with a reproductive system. Whether or not you’re having sex, you still have that system in your body, and it’s still affecting your body in different ways,” Lindeman reasoned.

    “How about we just teach people about how their bodies work first, before we start teaching them how they work to have sex,” Lindeman stated.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Large US tech companies face new EU rules | CNN Business

    Large US tech companies face new EU rules | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The world’s largest tech companies must comply with a sweeping new European law starting Friday that affects everything from social media moderation to targeted advertising and counterfeit goods in e-commerce — with possible ripple effects for the rest of the world.

    The unprecedented EU measures for online platforms will apply to companies including Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft, Snapchat and TikTok, among many others, reflecting one of the most comprehensive and ambitious efforts by policymakers anywhere to regulate tech giants through legislation. It could lead to fines for some companies and to changes in software affecting consumers.

    The rules seek to address some of the most serious concerns that critics of large tech platforms have raised in recent years, including the spread of misinformation and disinformation; possible harms to mental health, particularly for young people; rabbit holes of algorithmically recommended content and a lack of transparency; and the spread of illegal or fake products on virtual marketplaces.

    Although the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) passed last year, companies have had until now to prepare for its enforcement. Friday marks the arrival of a key compliance deadline — after which tech platforms with more than 45 million EU users will have to meet the obligations laid out in the law.

    The EU also says the law intends “to establish a level playing field to foster innovation, growth and competitiveness both in the European Single Market and globally.” The action reinforces Europe’s position as a leader in checking the power of large US tech companies.

    For all platforms, not just the largest ones, the DSA bans data-driven targeted advertising aimed at children, as well as targeted ads to all internet users based on protected characteristics such as political affiliation, sexual orientation and ethnicity. The restrictions apply to all kinds of online ads, including commercial advertising, political advertising and issue advertising. (Some platforms had already in recent years rolled out restrictions on targeted advertising based on protected characteristics.)

    The law bans so-called “dark patterns,” or the use of subtle design cues that may be intended to nudge consumers toward giving up their personal data or making other decisions that a company might prefer. An example of a dark pattern commonly cited by consumer groups is when a company tries to persuade a user to opt into tracking by highlighting an acceptance button with bright colors, while simultaneously downplaying the option to opt out by minimizing that choice’s font size or placement.

    The law also requires all online platforms to offer ways for users to report illegal content and products and for them to appeal content moderation decisions. And it requires companies to spell out their terms of service in an accessible manner.

    For the largest platforms, the law goes further. Companies designated as Very Large Online Platforms or Very Large Online Search Engines will be required to undertake independent risk assessments focused on, for example, how bad actors might try to manipulate their platforms, or use them to interfere with elections or to violate human rights — and companies must act to mitigate those risks. And they will have to set up repositories of the ads they’ve run and allow the public to inspect them.

    Just a handful of companies are considered very large platforms under the law. But the list finalized in April includes the most powerful tech companies in the world, and, for those firms, violations can be expensive. The DSA permits EU officials to issue fines worth up to 6% of a very large platform’s global annual revenue. That could mean billions in fines for a company as large as Meta, which last year reported more than $116 billion in revenue.

    Companies have spent months preparing for the deadline. As recently as this month, TikTok rolled out a tool for reporting illegal content and said it would give EU users specific explanations when their content is removed. It also said it would stop showing ads to teens in Europe based on the data the company has collected on them, all to comply with the DSA rules.

    “We’ve been supportive of the objectives of the DSA and the creation of a regulatory regime in Europe that minimizes harm,” said Nick Clegg, Meta’s president of global affairs and a former deputy prime minister of the UK, in a statement Tuesday. He said Meta assembled a 1,000-person team to prepare for DSA requirements. He outlined several efforts by the company including limits on what data advertisers can see on teens ages 13 to 17 who use Facebook and Instagram. He said advertisers can no longer target the teens based on their activity on those platforms. “Age and location is now the only information about teens that advertisers can use to show them ads,” he said.

    In a statement, a Microsoft spokesperson told CNN the DSA deadline “is an important milestone in the fight against illegal content online. We are mindful of our heightened responsibilities in the EU as a major technology company and continue to work with the European Commission on meeting the requirements of the DSA.”

    Snapchat parent Snap told CNN that it is working closely with the European Commission to ensure the company is compliant with the new law. Snap has appointed several dedicated compliance employees to monitor whether it is living up to its obligations, the company said, and has already implemented several safeguards.

    And Apple said in a statement that the DSA’s goals “align with Apple’s goals to protect consumers from illegal and harmful content. We are working to implement the requirements of the DSA with user privacy and security as our continued North Star.”

    Google and Pinterest told CNN they have also been working closely with the European Commission.

    “We share the DSA’s goals of making the internet even more safe, transparent and accountable, while making sure that European users, creators and businesses continue to enjoy the benefits of the web,” a Google spokesperson said.

    A Pinterest spokesperson said the company would “continue to engage with the European Commission on the implementation of the DSA to ensure a smooth transition into the new legal framework.” The spokesperson added: “The wellbeing, safety and privacy of our users is a priority and we will continue to build on our efforts.”

    Many companies should be able to comply with the law, given their existing policies, teams and monitoring tools, according to Robert Grosvenor, a London-based managing director at the consulting firm Alvarez & Marsal. “Europe’s largest online service providers are not starting from ground zero,” Grosvenor said. But, he added: “Whether they are ready to become a highly regulated sector is another matter.”

    EU officials have signaled they will be scrutinizing companies for violations. Earlier this summer, European officials performed preemptive “stress tests” of X, the company formerly known as Twitter, as well as Meta and TikTok to determine the companies’ readiness for the DSA.

    For much of the year, EU Commissioner Thierry Breton has been publicly reminding X of its coming obligations as the company has backslid on some of its content moderation practices. Even as Breton concluded that X was taking its stress test seriously in June, the company had just lost a top content moderation official and had withdrawn from a voluntary EU commitment on disinformation that European officials had said would be part of any evaluation of a platform’s compliance with the DSA.

    X told CNN ahead of Friday’s deadline that it was on track to comply with the new law.

    Analysts anticipate that the EU will be watching even more closely after the deadline — and some hope that the rules will either encourage tech platforms to replicate their practices in the EU voluntarily around the world or else drive policymakers to adopt similar measures.

    “We hope that these new laws will inspire other jurisdictions to act because these are, after all, global companies which apply many of the same practices worldwide,” said Agustin Reyna, head of legal and economic affairs at BEUC, a European consumer advocacy group. “Europe got the ball rolling, but we need other jurisdictions to win the match against tech giants.”

    Already, Amazon has sought to challenge the very large platform label in court, arguing that the DSA’s requirements are geared toward ad-based online speech platforms, that Amazon is a retail platform and that none of its direct rivals in Europe have likewise been labeled, despite being larger than Amazon within individual EU countries.

    The legal fights could present the first major test of the DSA’s durability in the face of Big Tech’s enormous resources. Amazon told CNN that it plans to comply with the EU General Court’s decision, either way.

    “Amazon shares the goal of the European Commission to create a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, and we invest significantly in protecting our store from bad actors, illegal content, and in creating a trustworthy shopping experience,” an Amazon spokesperson said. “We have built on this strong foundation for DSA compliance.”

    TikTok did not immediately respond to a request for comment on this story.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here’s what Donald Trump’s return to X could mean for the platform’s business | CNN Business

    Here’s what Donald Trump’s return to X could mean for the platform’s business | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Nine months after Elon Musk reinstated Donald Trump’s account on the social network previously known as Twitter, the former president has returned to what was once his platform of choice for communicating with the country.

    The return of Trump – who used to be one of the site’s most prominent, if controversial, users – could mark a turning point for the company now called X after months of turbulence. Trump, who has nearly 87 million followers, could attract a wide set of viewers, especially in the lead up to the 2024 presidential election, where he is the front-runner for the Republican nomination. But it could also present a new set of challenges for the social network, including for its effort to revive its ad business, if Trump decides to resume regularly posting on the platform at all.

    Trump on Thursday night posted on the platform for the first time since January 2021, when he was suspended for violating Twitter’s rules against glorification of violence in the wake of the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol. On Thursday, he posted a photo of his mug shot – the first such photo of a US president in history – after his surrender in Georgia on more than a dozen charges stemming from his efforts to reverse the 2020 election results there. He also added a link to a fundraiser.

    Trump’s return appeared to be welcomed by X owner Musk, who has been encouraging politicians and public figures to post on the site in a bid to improve user numbers. He shared Trump’s X post saying, “Next-level.” Later, appearing to reference the former president without explicitly naming him, Musk posted that “the speed at which your message on this platform can reach a vast number of people is mind-blowing.”

    X declined to comment for this story.

    If Trump decides to return to regularly posting on X, it could be a major boon to the platform’s effort to attract an audience as it faces increased competition. In the wake of controversial policy decisions by Musk, a slew of Twitter copycats have popped up as users seek alternative platforms, including Meta’s Threads, which rolled out a key update this week. The week of July 17, traffic to then-Twitter was down more than 9% compared to the same period in the prior year, according to the most recent public report from web traffic intelligence firm Similarweb.

    Musk’s changes at the company have also irked some advertisers, weighing on X’s core business.

    When he was president, Trump’s posts on what was then Twitter often moved the markets, set the news cycle and drove the agenda in Washington – a fact that benefited the company in the form of countless hours of user engagement and almost certainly could again. And while Trump has remained mostly on his own platform, Truth Social, since he was suspended from many mainstream social networks in early 2021, X would give him a larger reach as he vies for the 2024 Republican nomination.

    Trump’s return “should have a positive impact on [X’s] engagement at a time when it needs it,” D.A. Davidson analyst Tom Forte told CNN in an email Friday.

    (It’s not clear how Musk – who has often been X’s main character since his takeover, thanks in some cases to his own policy decisions – would feel about sharing the spotlight.)

    That engagement could be a selling point for X in its quest to lure advertisers back to the platform. But Trump’s return could also raise fresh concerns for advertisers, some of whom have pulled back their spending on the platform over fears that their ads could run next to controversial or potentially objectionable content as Musk has reduced content moderation on the site.

    Musk said last month that the company still had negative cash flow because of a 50% decline in revenue from its core ad business, although CEO Linda Yaccarino said weeks later the company is now “close to break-even.”

    And while X’s leadership has said advertisers are returning thanks to new brand safety controls, at least two brands recently paused their spending on the platform after their ads were run alongside an account celebrating the Nazi party. (X suspended the account after it was flagged and said ad impressions on the page were minimal.)

    Trump frequently pushed boundaries when he was active on Twitter. For years, the platform took a light-touch approach to moderating his account, arguing at times that as a public official, the then-president must be given wide latitude to speak. Now, if Trump returns to his old habits – the former president has, for example, continued to falsely claim in posts on Truth Social that the 2020 election was stolen – Musk could be forced to decide whether to risk alienating additional advertisers or compromise his stated commitment to “free speech.”

    Forte said he will be closely watching the impact of Trump’s return on Twitter’s advertising business. “The increased engagement should be favorable, but there is a risk that heightened controversy could hamper ad sales,” he said.

    And it’s not yet clear whether Trump will actually return to being active on X beyond Thursday’s post, which was essentially a fundraising appeal, and similar to what he posted on Truth Social. After Facebook restored Trump’s account earlier this year, many of his posts on that platform have been aimed at directing users to donate or volunteer for his campaign.

    What’s more, after making his return to X, Trump appeared to try to clarify where his loyalty lies. “I LOVE TRUTH SOCIAL. IT IS MY HOME!!” Trump posted on the X competitor platform.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Abortion politics take center stage after Biden campaign capitalizes on GOP debate rift | CNN Politics

    Abortion politics take center stage after Biden campaign capitalizes on GOP debate rift | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    More than a year after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Republican candidates remain split over how to move forward on abortion, a political liability Democrats are eager to exploit regardless of who becomes the Republican nominee.

    The GOP divide was laid bare on the debate stage this week, as candidates backed a 15-week abortion ban, deferred to the states or tried to split the difference. President Joe Biden’s campaign responded immediately in a new digital ad, painting the field’s top contenders as extreme on the issue – and signaling what the Democratic campaign is likely to focus on in the coming year.

    When it comes to the future of abortion access, Republican candidates are facing pressure on all sides.

    GOP-led state legislatures have passed a wave of complete or near-total abortion bans that go beyond what most Americans support. Voters have supported abortion rights ballot initiatives and candidates in several key elections over the last year. And anti-abortion and evangelical groups are demanding presidential candidates go on the offensive and get as specific as possible.

    “The debate reflected the many different views among Republicans regarding abortion policy: not only what the policy ought to be, but what level of government ought to be making the decisions,” said Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster. “There’s no real consensus at this point.”

    Biden’s reelection campaign has also homed in on remarks GOP candidates made on abortion during the debate. In talking points sent out to surrogates Wednesday night, the campaign claimed Republicans “spent two hours shouting over each other on … who has the best plan to ban abortion nationwide,” CNN reported Thursday.

    Biden’s team followed up Friday morning with a digital ad, “These Guys,” highlighting comments former President Donald Trump, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis have made on abortion, including a clip of DeSantis on the debate stage. The ad, aimed at women in seven battleground states, is part of a $25 million ad campaign CNN first reported earlier this week.

    The ad also reaffirms Biden’s stance on abortion: that the U.S. should maintain the standard set in the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which allowed for abortion up until fetal viability, generally viewed as around 24 weeks.

    “This ad is the first of many that will hold all MAGA Republicans accountable for their extreme, losing positions throughout the cycle, while also highlighting the President’s support for women and their fundamental freedoms,” Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said in a statement.

    Polling suggests that Americans support some legal abortion, but with limits. Seventy-three percent of respondents to an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll released last month said abortion should be allowed during the first six weeks of pregnancy, including 88% of Democrats and 56% of Republicans surveyed. Asked if states should allow abortion at 15 weeks, 51% of those surveyed said yes, including 75% of Democrats and 29% of Republicans.

    Only 27% of those surveyed supported allowing abortion until 24 weeks of pregnancy.

    Democrats are hoping that abortion access will continue to be an issue that helps them with voters heading into 2024. Since last year’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision overturned Roe and left abortion access up to individual states, Democrats and abortion rights activists have racked up a number of wins in special elections and ballot initiatives, and the party overperformed in the 2022 midterm elections.

    Trump – whose handpicked nominees lost key Senate races in Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania and Georgia – went on to write a January social media post blaming the party’s midterm losses on “the ‘abortion issue,’ poorly handled by many Republicans, especially those that insisted on No Exceptions.”

    Tom Bonier, chief executive of TargetSmart, a Democratic political targeting firm, said he expects abortion will be an even stronger issue for his party heading into the 2024 election.

    “The evidence that we’re seeing at this point is that abortion rights as a political issue is having an even greater impact than it did last year, which is saying a lot because it had a huge impact on elections in 2022,” he said.

    Bonier cited two causes for abortion’s growing influence. Voters, he said, no longer have to imagine what life would look like after Roe. They’re experiencing it firsthand. At the same time, Republicans have not adopted their message to address the political climate, he said. That dynamic was on display in the ad released by the Biden campaign Friday.

    “It literally speaks for itself as an issue at this point, that Republicans have not moderated, that in some ways they’ve actually got further to the right,” he said.

    Nearly two dozen states have moved to ban or restrict abortion in the wake of Dobbs. Some of the bans have been blocked in court, including the six-week limit DeSantis signed in April. Abortion is currently legal in Florida until 15 weeks of pregnancy.

    Republicans have begun to coalesce around the idea of a federal abortion ban after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, an anti-abortion group, has called on candidates to support the 15-week limit at minimum, with room for states to pass more restrictive measures.

    “A number of GOP officeholders and even presidential aspirants use ‘states’ rights’ as an excuse to tape their mouths shut on abortion,” Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, wrote in a Thursday Washington Post op-ed with former Trump White House senior adviser Kellyanne Conway. “This should not, and will not, stand.”

    Former UN Ambassador and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum and DeSantis all declined to commit to signing a 15-week ban, while former Vice President Mike Pence and Scott did. The latter two criticized their opponents in post-debate interviews. Scott said in a Thursday Fox News interview that it is “a problem for our nation” that some candidates said they would not commit to a 15-week ban, while Pence also took a jab at Trump.

    “Whether it be with Gov. Desantis or Nikki Haley or others onstage, frankly most of the candidates running, including the one that did not show up tonight, are all trying to relegate the question of abortion as a states-only issue,” he told CNN’s Dana Bash on Wednesday.

    Trump has not said whether he would back a 15-week ban and has suggested he would leave it with the states. In May, he criticized the six-week ban DeSantis signed as “too harsh” for the anti-abortion movement but declined to say whether he supported it personally. A month later he told the audience at a Faith and Freedom Coalition conference that while there “remains a vital role for the federal government” to play in abortion policy, people want it to be a state-level issue.

    “I believe the greatest progress for pro-life is now being made in the states, where everyone wanted to be,” Trump said. Pence used his remarks at the same conference to call on every GOP candidate to back a 15-week ban as a national standard.

    If a consensus is reached it will likely be whatever the eventual Republican nominee backs, though Ayres would advise candidates to leave the issue to the states — if that’s what they personally believe, he said.

    “Ultimately, a candidate has to look into his or her heart and soul to find a position they’re comfortable with, otherwise, they’ll never be able to articulate it effectively,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk blames the ADL for 60% ad sales decline at X, threatens to sue | CNN Business

    Elon Musk blames the ADL for 60% ad sales decline at X, threatens to sue | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    X owner Elon Musk is threatening to sue the Anti-Defamation League for defamation, claiming that the nonprofit organization’s statements about rising hate speech on the social media platform have torpedoed X’s advertising revenue.

    In a post on X, formerly known as Twitter, Musk said US advertising revenue is “still down 60%, primarily due to pressure on advertisers by @ADL (that’s what advertisers tell us), so they almost succeeded in killing X/Twitter!”

    Musk also claimed that since he took over the platform in October 2022, the ADL “has been trying to kill this platform by falsely accusing it & me of being anti-Semitic.”

    “To clear our platform’s name on the matter of anti-Semitism, it looks like we have no choice but to file a defamation lawsuit against the Anti-Defamation League … oh the irony!” he said.

    The ADL said as a matter of policy it does not comment on legal threats. But the organization noted it recently met with X leadership, including CEO Linda Yaccarino, who Musk hired to help revive ad revenue. Yaccarino thanked ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt following the meeting last week, saying in a post on X, “A strong and productive partnership is built on good intentions and candor.”

    Meanwhile, Musk, the platform’s owner, has recently liked and engaged with a series of posts criticizing the organization.

    A #BanTheADL campaign has spread on X, and the ADL accused Musk of “lifting” the campaign.

    “ADL is unsurprised yet undeterred that antisemites, white supremacists, conspiracy theorists and other trolls have launched a coordinated attack on our organization. This type of thing is nothing new,” an ADL spokesperson said.

    The ADL and other similar organizations, including the Center for Countering Digital Hate, have found that the volume of hate speech on the website has grown dramatically under Musk’s stewardship.

    In one instance, the CCDH found the daily use of the n-word under Musk is triple the 2022 average and the use of slurs against gay men and trans persons are up 58% and 62%, respectively. The ADL said in a separate report that its data shows “both an increase in antisemitic content on the platform and a decrease in the moderation of antisemitic posts.”

    Musk called the reports in May by the two watchdog groups “utterly false,” claiming that “hate speech impressions,” or the number of times a tweet containing hate speech has been viewed, “continue to decline” since his early days of owning the company when the platform saw a spike in hate speech designed to test Musk’s tolerance.

    Still, two brands last month paused their ad spending on X after their advertisements ran alongside an account promoting Nazism. X suspended the account after the issue was flagged and said ad impressions on the page were minimal.

    Last month, Musk sued the CCDH, accusing the nonprofit group of deliberately trying to drive advertisers away from the platform by publishing reports critical of the platform’s response to hateful content.

    It specifically claims CCDH violated the platform’s terms of service, and federal hacking laws, by scraping data from the company’s platform and by encouraging an unnamed individual to improperly collect information about Twitter that it had provided to a third-party brand monitoring provider.

    In response, CCDH’s CEO Imran Ahmed previously told CNN that much of the lawsuit, particularly its claim about the unnamed individual, “sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory to me.”

    “The truth is that he’s [Elon Musk] been casting around for a reason to blame us for his own failings as a CEO,” Ahmed said, “because we all know that when he took over, he put up the bat signal to racists and misogynists, to homophobes, to antisemites, saying ‘Twitter is now a free-speech platform.’ … And now he’s surprised when people are able to quantify that there has been a resulting increase in hate and disinformation.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Google to require disclosures of AI content in political ads | CNN Business

    Google to require disclosures of AI content in political ads | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Starting in November, Google will require political advertisements to prominently disclose when they feature synthetic content — such as images generated by artificial intelligence — the tech giant announced this week.

    Political ads that feature synthetic content that “inauthentically represents real or realistic-looking people or events” must include a “clear and conspicuous” disclosure for viewers who might see the ad, Google said Wednesday in a blog post. The rule, an addition to the company’s political content policy that covers Google and YouTube, will apply to image, video and audio content.

    The policy update comes as campaign season for the 2024 US presidential election ramps up and as a number of countries around the world prepare for their own major elections the same year. At the same time, artificial intelligence technology has advanced rapidly, allowing anyone to cheaply and easily create convincing AI-generated text and, increasingly, audio and video. Digital information integrity experts have raised alarms that these new AI tools could lead to a wave of election misinformation that social media platforms and regulators may be ill-prepared to handle.

    AI-generated images have already begun to crop up in political advertisements. In June, a video posted to X by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ presidential campaign used images that appeared to be generated by artificial intelligence showing former President Donald Trump hugging Dr. Anthony Fauci. The images, which appeared designed to criticize Trump for not firing the nation’s then-top infectious disease specialist, were tricky to spot: They were shown alongside real images of the pair and with a text overlay saying, “real life Trump.”

    The Republican National Committee in April released a 30-second advertisement responding to President Joe Biden’s official campaign announcement that used AI images to imagine a dystopian United States after the reelection of the 46th president. The RNC ad included the small on-screen disclaimer, “Built entirely with AI imagery,” but some potential voters in Washington, DC, to whom CNN showed the video did not notice it on their first watch.

    In its policy update, Google said it will require disclosures on ads using synthetic content in a way that could mislead users. The company said, for example, that an “ad with synthetic content that makes it appear as if a person is saying or doing something they didn’t say or do” would need a label.

    Google said the policy will not apply to synthetic or altered content that is “inconsequential to the claims made in the ad,” including changes such as image resizing, color corrections or “background edits that do not create realistic depictions of actual events.”

    A group of top artificial intelligence companies, including Google, agreed in July to a set of voluntary commitments put forth by the Biden administration to help improve safety around their AI technologies. As part of that agreement, the companies said they would develop technical mechanisms, such as watermarks, to ensure users know when content was generated by AI.

    The Federal Election Commission has also been exploring how to regulate AI in political ads.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Bed Bath & Beyond is back from the dead | CNN Business

    Bed Bath & Beyond is back from the dead | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    A month after Overstock.com announced it bought Bed Bath & Beyond’s brand out of bankruptcy, the company has dumped its name and morphed its website and app.

    On Tuesday, Overstock’s website relaunched as BedBathandBeyond.com, a move that merges Overstock’s online business model and merchandise categories with popular branded products favored by Bed Bath & Beyond shoppers.

    “All of Overstock’s categories will transition over and new products will also come in,” Jonathan Johnson, CEO of Overstock, said in an interview with CNN.

    The relaunched website touted a “Welcome to a bigger, better beyond” welcome message, offering deals of an extra 15%-20% off bedding, bath and furniture items.

    “Since this deal was announced, we have added over 600,000 new products to the site,” said Johnson, adding that a lot of the new products “are the name-brand products that people have always bought and expected to buy at the old Bed Bath & Beyond.”

    Overstock

    (OSTK)    , which sells furniture, home furnishings, bath, lighting, rugs and an array of other products online at discounted prices, acquired Bed Bath & Beyond’s name, intellectual property and digital assets in June with a winning bid of $21.5 million for its assets.

    Johnson promised newness blended with familiarity for Bed Bath & Beyond customers in the latest digital-only version of the retailer.

    “It will have the same great bed, bath and kitchen items but it will also have a much bigger beyond,” he said. The “beyond” includes a wider array of linens, cookware and small appliances.

    Fans of Bed Bath & Beyond’s 20%-off a single item “Big Blue” coupon will be somewhat disappointed that it will not be resurrected.

    “I guess what I would say about the coupon is that if you like Bed Bath & Beyond coupons in the past, you will like new Bed Bath & Beyond mobile app we will be rolling out with launch in US,” said Johnson.

    He said shoppers can avail themselves of special deals and promotions through the new app, including a 25% off coupon for downloading the app and making purchases. Former Overstock.com loyalty program members will get a 20% off coupon and their membership transferred to the rebranded loyalty program.

    BedBathand Beyond.com is also reinstating up to $50 in unused loyalty rewards points for active members of the former Bed Bath & Beyond loyalty program. “Those rewards points had gone away in the bankruptcy,” he said.

    Overstock.com relaunched as BedBathandBeyond.com Tuesday.

    “We’ll still be offering coupons even if they’re not as large as the 20% coupon that people expected and frankly demanded from Bed Bath & Beyond,” said Johnson.

    What’s not coming back — at least in the foreseeable future — are physical stores.

    “Never say never,” said Johnson. “We’re focused on this transition now and we like our asset-light business model…. But never say never. We’ll look, we may test, but right now, it’s not in the current strategic plan.”

    Bed Bath & Beyond announced in April it would close all 360 of its stores and go out of business.

    One change that Overstock is contemplating is the company ticker symbol.

    “We think the corporate name, which is Overstock and ticker ‘OSTK’ is probably not a fit anymore. We’re figuring out what to do. We’re not sure we want it to be the “BBBY” tainted ticker of a meme stock gone bankrupt. We’ll find the right name in time.”

    Bed Bath & Beyond’s return comes close on the heels another iconic retail brand’s comeback.

    Babies R Us, which went out of business in tandem with its parent company, Toys R Us, in 2018, opened its new US flagship store last month at the American Dream Mall in New Jersey.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ad wars heat up in the 2024 presidential race as spending nears $70 million | CNN Politics

    Ad wars heat up in the 2024 presidential race as spending nears $70 million | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump is dominating cable airwaves, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is betting on Iowa and South Carolina, and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum is blanketing New Hampshire as candidates tailor their ad spending with the 2024 presidential race heating up.

    Spending data from AdImpact shows how the various White House contenders have different strategies for the early primary map, investing resources in the states and messages they hope can serve as launching pads to the nomination – spending nearly $70 million along the way.

    Allies of Trump, the front-runner for the GOP nomination, have taken a unique approach among the crowded field, devoting more than three-quarters of their ad spending dollars to national cable advertising campaign.

    MAGA Inc., the super PAC backing his campaign, has spent $15.7 million on national cable advertising out of a total of nearly $20 million in ad spending so far. The pro-Trump group has split the rest of its spending, a little more than $4 million, between Iowa and New Hampshire.

    Reflecting that strategy, in the last month, MAGA Inc. spent $1.6 million on an ad running in major media markets (Los Angeles, New York City, Washington, DC, and Philadelphia) which criticizes the former president’s indictment in the classified documents case. The super PAC has also kept ads attacking DeSantis in rotation in the early primary states.

    There are also hints at the strategy of DeSantis’ camp in the ad spending of a super PAC backing his campaign, Never Back Down. The group has spent a total of about $15.5 million on advertising so far, directing $4.3 million to Iowa and $3.7 million to South Carolina. On Tuesday, the group launched a new TV spot in Iowa proclaiming that DeSantis was “waging a war on woke and winning.”

    By contrast, the group has spent just $1.3 million in New Hampshire so far. Notably, Never Back Down has spent about $630,000 in Nevada, another early voting state, making it the only GOP group with a significant presence on the airwaves there. The group has also spent about $5 million on national cable advertising.

    South Carolina Sen Tim. Scott – another top advertiser in the early going of the White House race – has taken a traditional approach to ad budgeting, splitting his advertising between Iowa, where he’s spent about $3.5 million, and New Hampshire, where he’s spent about $2 million. In both states, he’s been a steady presence on the air, running ads that tout his “conservative values” and feature clips from the campaign trail.

    And the super PAC allied with Scott has followed a similar pattern, spending about $3.1 million in Iowa and $1.9 million in New Hampshire. Unlike the Trump and DeSantis super PACs, Scott and his camp have spent little on national advertising campaigns.

    Meanwhile, North Dakota’s Burgum has emerged as the top advertiser in New Hampshire so far, spending more than $2.1 million in the state as the independently wealthy candidate works to raise his profile among voters.

    Burgum has also spent $2 million advertising in Iowa. Excluding outside groups, only Scott has spent more on campaign advertising – and even including the super PACs, Burgum is the fifth biggest advertiser in the race so far.

    A look at who has spent money so far on 2024 ads

  • MAGA Inc.: $19,922,815
  • Never Back Down: $15,511,532
  • Scott for President $5,679,567
  • Trust in the Mission PAC $5,605,080
  • Burgum for President: $4,220,175
  • Perry Johnson for President: $2,119,553
  • Future Forward USA Action: $2,063,400
  • Biden Victory Fund: $2,022,898
  • Democratic National Committee/Biden: $1,636,147
  • Ramaswamy for President: $1,409,095
  • American Action Network: $1,219,358
  • Trump Save America Joint Fundraising Committee: $877,800
  • Binkley for President: $857,445
  • SOS America PAC: $827,280
  • Defending Democracy Together: $786,377
  • DeSantis for President: $763,910
  • Biden for President: $758,026
  • Trump for President: $682,998

Overall, since the start of 2023, all campaigns and outside groups have combined to spend nearly $70 million on advertising for the presidential race already. That amount is nearly double what had been spent at this point in the last presidential cycle – during a competitive Democratic primary – when all candidates and groups had spent about $35 million in the first six months of 2019.

This year, Trump’s super PAC, DeSantis’ super PAC, Scott and his super PAC, and Burgum account for over half that total, combining to spend just over $50 million.

Only two other candidates have spent more than $1 million on ads so far: Vivek Ramaswamy and Perry Johnson, both of whom are independently wealthy businessmen self-funding their campaigns.

And while candidates have taken different approaches to investing their resources, the traditional early voting states are continuing to draw the lion’s share of the ad dollars. Candidates and groups have spent about $17.4 million in Iowa, $10.9 million in New Hampshire, $3.9 million in South Carolina, and $830,000 in Nevada.

The ad wars are heating up as candidates in the crowded GOP field are scrambling to qualify for the first presidential debate in August.

Several long-shot Republican presidential candidates, with smaller budgets for TV advertising, have been appealing to donors online to help them make the debate stage after the Republican National Committee released the qualification requirements, which include both polling and fundraising thresholds.

As he seeks to nab the 40,000 individual donors required to be on stage, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson is up with Facebook ads that read, “I am running for President to bring out the best in America. From securing the border to creating a robust economy, I have the experience to deliver. Chip in $3, $5, or $10 today to help me get on the debate stage and move our nation forward.”

Ramaswamy – who is self-funding his campaign – is also urging supporters to help him qualify. “To secure a prime spot on the debate stage, we need solid polling numbers AND unique grassroots donors. Can you chip in just $1 today to help get to the debate stage?,” one of Ramaswamy’s ads says.

And Johnson, the wealthy Michigan businessman, is making similar appeals. “Even though I’m self-funding, the RNC is requiring that I get 40,000 donors to make the debate stage. Can you donate $1 NOW to ensure that I make the cut to share my plan to stop inflation and balance the budget?,” reads one of his ads.

[ad_2]

Source link

  • The world’s biggest ad agency is going all in on AI with Nvidia’s help | CNN Business

    The world’s biggest ad agency is going all in on AI with Nvidia’s help | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    London
    CNN
     — 

    WPP, the world’s largest advertising agency, has teamed up with chipmaker Nvidia to create ads using generative artificial intelligence.

    The companies announced the partnership Monday, with Nvidia

    (NVDA)     CEO Jensen Huang unveiling WPP’s new content engine during a demo at Computex Taipei.

    “Generative AI is changing the world of marketing at incredible speed. This new technology will transform the way that brands create content for commercial use,” WPP CEO Mark Read said in a statement.

    The platform will enable WPP

    (WPP)    ’s creative teams to integrate content from organizations such as Adobe and Getty Images with generative AI to produce advertising campaigns “more efficiently and at scale,” according to WPP

    (WPP)    . This would enable companies to make large volumes of advertising content, such as images or videos, “more tailored and immersive,” the company added.

    In the demo screened by Huang, WPP had created realistic footage of a car driving through a desert.

    The new AI-powered content engine means that same car could be placed on a street in London or pictured in Rio de Janeiro to target the Brazilian market — all without the need for costly on location production.

    Just as advertising campaigns can be rapidly adapted for different countries or cities, they can also be customized for different digital channels, such as Facebook or TikTok, and their users.

    “You can build very finely tuned campaigns to resonate with an audience… On the other hand, you could make up imaginary scenarios that never existed in real life,” Greg Estes, vice president of developer programs at Nvidia told CNN.

    The platform is the latest example of how AI is being rapidly deployed by major companies to enhance productivity and deliver new products to customers. Many in the advertising and media industries are concerned about threats to their jobs because of the way that AI is able to aggregate information and create visual content indistinguishable from photography.

    WPP said its new platform “outperforms current methods” of having people “manually create hundreds of thousands of pieces of content using disparate data coming from disconnected tools and systems.” In other words, the new technology could mean that much smaller creative teams are ultimately able to do the same amount of work.

    “It’s much easier to identify the jobs that AI will disrupt than it is to identify the jobs that AI will create,” Read told the Financial Times Monday. “We’ve applied AI a lot to our media business, but very little to the creative parts of our business.”

    Nvidia’s Huang said: “The world’s industries, including the $700 billion digital advertising industry, are racing to realize the benefits of AI,” adding that WPP would now enable brands to “deploy product experiences and compelling content at a level of realism and scale never possible before.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here’s what we know about First Republic Bank | CNN Business

    Here’s what we know about First Republic Bank | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story first appeared in CNN Business’ Before the Bell newsletter. Not a subscriber? You can sign up right here. You can listen to an audio version of the newsletter by clicking the same link.


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    First Republic Bank has been teetering on the edge for weeks. It may be finally falling.

    The San Francisco-based lender could be next in the line to collapse, following in the footsteps of former competitors Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.

    It certainly fits the bill: First Republic

    (FRC)    , like SVB, is a mid-sized regional bank with a highly concentrated customer base, outsized amounts of uninsured deposits and loads of unrealized losses on the bonds and treasuries it holds.

    Rumors swirled on Wednesday as publications rushed out reports from unnamed sources saying that the bank was looking to cut a deal to sell assets, that the White House wasn’t interested in facilitating a bailout (there were also reports that it is) and that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is considering downgrading the bank’s debt, which would limit its access to essential Federal Reserve loans.

    The FDIC, Federal Reserve, White House and First Republic did not respond to requests for comment about those reports. But the damage has been done.

    Shares of the stock fell by nearly 30% on Wednesday, after plunging by 49% on Tuesday. The stock’s trading was halted numerous times both days as its rapid decline triggered volatility-triggered timeouts by the New York Stock Exchange.

    But what’s actually happening here?

    The reality of the situation: What we do know for certain is that First Republic reported on Monday that its total deposits fell 41% in the first quarter of 2023 to $104.5 billion, even after a consortium of banks stepped in with $30 billion to prevent the lender from failing. Without that cash infusion, deposits would have fallen by over 50%.

    But, importantly, the bank said that while it saw a sharp drop in deposit activity after the collapse of SVB and Signature Bank last month, activity began to stabilize at the end of March and has since remained steady.

    We also know that First Republic’s net interest income, which shows how much money the bank earned from lending and borrowing, was down 19.4% year-over-year at the end of the first quarter.

    On top of all that, the bank is vulnerable to liquidity problems.

    When the banking crisis erupted in mid-March, about two-thirds of First Republic’s deposits were uninsured with the FDIC. That’s lower than the 94% at Silicon Valley Bank — but at the end of last year, First Republic had an exceptionally high ratio of 111% for loans and long-term investments to deposits, according to S&P Global — meaning it has loaned and invested more money than it has in deposits.

    In short: The outlook for the bank is not good.

    “It’s becoming clearer each day” that First Republic is “toast,” said Don Bilson at Gordon Haskett, in a note Wednesday. “The only question that really needs to be answered is whether the [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation] moves in before the weekend or during the weekend, which is when it usually does its thing.”

    Possible solutions: We also know that it’s not over until it’s over, and that the bank is still operating. There are still some narrow paths forward.

    There’s a small chance that First Republic stays the course and “muddles along as a standalone company,” said David Chiaverini, managing director of equity research at Wedbush Securities.

    What’s more likely is that the company will try to sell some of its loans and securities at the same cost they bought them for. In exchange, the buyer would receive a preferred equity interest in the company.

    That will be a tough sell since those assets would probably sell for well above market rate. First Republic’s bonds maturing in 2046 are currently trading at just 43 cents on the dollar. But the bank has been lucky before. First Republic has stayed afloat since March largely thanks to a $30 billion bailout from a conglomerate of large US banks and a $70 billion line of credit from JPMorgan.

    The third option is the worst for shareholders: the bank could go into receivership. When a struggling bank goes into receivership it means that a regulatory authority or government agency takes control of the bank and its assets, usually with the goal of liquidating those assets to repay the bank’s creditors.

    Investors in First Republic would most likely see their money wiped out in that scenario.

    Coming next: First Republic is in a very tricky situation. Investors will be crossing their fingers and holding their breath until Friday at 4 p.m. ET. That’s when newly-collapsed banks have admitted defeat in the past.

    Facebook-parent Meta on Wednesday reported that it grew sales by 3% during the first three months of the year, reversing a trend of three consecutive quarters of revenue declines and far exceeding Wall Street analysts’ expectations, reports my colleague Clare Duffy.

    Meta shares jumped as much as 12% in after-hours trading following the report, continuing the company’s strong trajectory since CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced that 2023 would be a “year of efficiency.”

    Another bright spot: user growth was relatively strong compared to recent quarters. The number of monthly active people on Meta’s family of apps grew 5% from the prior year to more than 3.8 billion and Facebook daily active users increased 4% to more than 2 billion.

    Still, Meta has a big hill ahead of it. The company also reported that profits declined by nearly a quarter to $5.7 billion compared to the same period in the prior year. Price per advertisement — an indicator of the health of the company’s core digital ad business — also decreased by 17% from the year prior.

    Meta has been in the midst of a massive restructuring, as it attempts to recover from a perfect storm of heightened competition, lingering recession fears resulting in fewer ad dollars and a multibillion dollar effort to build a future version of the internet it calls the metaverse.

    Meta said in November it would eliminate 11,000 jobs, the single largest round of cuts in its history. And in March, Zuckerberg announced Meta would lay off another 10,000 employees. All told, the cuts will shrink Meta’s workforce by a quarter.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Manhattan prosecutors ask judge to limit Trump’s ability to publicize information about his criminal case | CNN Politics

    Manhattan prosecutors ask judge to limit Trump’s ability to publicize information about his criminal case | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Prosecutors with the Manhattan district attorney’s office have asked the judge overseeing Donald Trump’s criminal case to impose a protective order restricting the former president’s ability to publicize information about the investigation.

    In a motion, prosecutors told the judge that Trump’s team would not consent to a protective order.

    “The risk that this Defendant will use the Covered Materials inappropriately is substantial. Defendant has a long history of discussing his legal matters publicly—including by targeting witnesses, jurors, investigators, prosecutors, and judges with harassing, embarrassing, and threatening statements on social media and in other public forums—and he has already done so in this case,” prosecutors wrote in the filing.

    Manhattan prosecutors have accused Trump of falsifying business records with the intent to conceal illegal conduct connected to his 2016 presidential campaign. The criminal charges stem from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s investigation into hush money payments, made during the 2016 campaign, to women who claimed they had extramarital affairs with Trump, which he denies. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all of the charges.

    In seeking the protective order, prosecutors cited some of Trump’s past attacks on witnesses who previously spoke out against him, including his former personal attorney Michael Cohen and Alexander Vindman, a former national security official who testified publicly during Trump’s first impeachment.

    They asked the judge to order that Trump only be allowed to view certain material turned over by prosecutors in the presence of his defense counsel and not allow him to copy material designated as “limited dissemination materials.”

    Specifically, they asked the judge to instruct anyone who receives materials, including grand jury testimony, to not post them on any news organization or social media websites without approval from the judge. They also asked the judge to limit the use of any materials they provide to Trump to defending the present case.

    “At the outset, it is important to note that the People are not at this time seeking a gag order in this case. Defendant has a constitutional right to speak publicly about this case, and the People do not seek to infringe upon that right,” prosecutors wrote.

    Prosecutors also asked the judge to limit the review of images of two cell phones related to a witness in the case to Trump’s defense lawyers, saying there is highly personal information included on the phones.

    In addition to limiting the disclosure of certain information prosecutors turn over to Trump from becoming public, they also asked the judge to limit the disclosure of identifying information about any support staff working for the prosecution team to the public until jury selection begins in the case.

    They cited Trump’s past statements about Bragg and the judge in the case.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Family of victim and survivors of Indianapolis FedEx mass shooting file lawsuit against gun magazine manufacturer and distributors | CNN

    Family of victim and survivors of Indianapolis FedEx mass shooting file lawsuit against gun magazine manufacturer and distributors | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The family of a victim and several survivors of a mass shooting at a FedEx facility in Indianapolis filed a lawsuit against companies involved in the manufacturing, marketing and sale of the high capacity magazine used by the gunman who killed 8 people and injured several others in 2021.

    The federal lawsuit, filed in US District Court in the Western District of New York, targets a gun distributor and magazine manufacturers, and alleges the companies recklessly marketed and sold their products to impulsive young men at risk of violence.

    The gunman in the April 15, 2021, attack, Brandon Hole, 19, was previously employed at the facility and opened fire on his former coworkers before killing himself. About a year before the attack, Hole browsed White supremacist websites, CNN previously reported. His mother contacted the police in March 2020 because she was worried about his behavior and threatening statements he’d made after he purchased a gun, according to police.

    The lawsuit was filed Thursday on behalf of the estate of Jaswinder Singh, who was killed during the shooting, Harpreet Singh, who was injured, and his wife Dilpreet Kaur, and Lakhwinder Kaur, who was also injured in the attack. They are each seeking at least $75,000 from the lawsuit and are asking for a jury trial, according to the complaint.

    The lawsuit targets American Tactical Inc., an American firearms importer, manufacturer and seller, along with the company’s president and the director of marketing and purchasing. Schmeisser GmbH, a German firearms manufacturer; and 365 Plus d.o.o., a Slovenian company that designs, produces and distributes firearms accessories and other tactical equipment are also listed as defendants.

    The three companies were involved in the manufacturing, marketing and sale of the 60-round high-capacity magazines that “have been used repeatedly to slaughter and terrorize Americans in horrific mass shootings since long before April 2021,” the lawsuit says.

    The lawsuit claims these companies made these magazines easily accessible to Hole and targeted their marketing campaign to “a consumer base filled with impulsive young men who feel they need to harm others in order to prove their strength and who have militaristic delusions of fighting in a war or a video game.”

    “This case is about what happens when companies recklessly design, market, sell, and distribute these accessories to the general public—indiscriminately—and without adherence to reasonable safeguards,” the lawsuit reads.

    American Tactical declined to comment to CNN about the lawsuit. Lawyers for the other defendants did not immediately respond to requests.

    Schmeisser GmbH manufactured the magazine used in the mass shooting and distributed it in the US through American Tactical and 365 Plus, the lawsuit claims.

    “The high capacity of the magazine emboldened the shooter to commit the attack, knowing he had the ability to fire 60 rounds continuously without the need to pause to reload,” the lawsuit says.

    The complaint says American Tactical promoted marketing videos that show men dressed in tactical vests similar to what Hole wore during the 2021 attack as they fire “a constant stream of bullets at unseen targets in various offensive, tactical operations.”

    The lawsuit alleges the firearm companies placed an “unreasonably dangerous product on the market without sufficient safeguards to prevent its foreseeable unlawful use.”

    The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, the gun control advocacy organization that employs two of several lawyers representing the plaintiffs, wrote in a statement to CNN the nonprofit is “trying to achieve justice for these survivors and their family, and hold American Tactical, Inc. accountable for their irresponsible marketing and sales practices.”

    “If you decide to sell such highly lethal products to the general public anyway, you need to be very careful about who you’re selling them to. As we allege in our complaint, defendants here have instead taken a hard turn and specifically marketed their highly lethal products to a dangerous class of individuals,” said Philip Bangle, the Brady Center’s senior litigation council.

    [ad_2]

    Source link