Apple Resumes Advertising on X(daringfireball.net)
daringfireball.net
Apple Resumes Advertising on X
https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/02/12/apple-advertising-x
128 comments
Thanks. These discussions are so unbelievably bad* that the user flags must be correct.
* By "bad" I mean bad for HN: low-substance, flamey, high-indignation, high-snark. Not what this site is for.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
* By "bad" I mean bad for HN: low-substance, flamey, high-indignation, high-snark. Not what this site is for.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Thank You. At least some on HN knows
These two discussions are flagged, lol. I bet this one will be flagged too. Is there a group of people who don’t want this news to spread?
I think political news are not encouraged here, exceptions for when interesting discussions are possible.
Judging by the quality of comments here and in the linked submissions, it's a good thing.
Judging by the quality of comments here and in the linked submissions, it's a good thing.
It’s definitely not political news. I don’t see any guideline term that it violated.
What's going on at the moment isn't politics and that's why it's being discussed so heavily.
No, it is politics. Apple stopped advertising on X over politics, not technical reasons. The Democrat-run media has successfully convinced a large number of highly conformist individuals that we've got another Hitler on our hands, and a lot of these people opine about their paranoia extensively on HN.
It's also a dupe. Doesn't matter if they were eventually flagged, there was already a bunch of views, upvotes, and discussion. Flagging after awhile is annoying, but also discussion devolves. It's not nothing tho. All is not lost. Stuff moves fast around here. And discussion continues there also as ppl follow the links.
Yes it's curious, that - it's an interesting story (although the comments aren't always thoughtful and substantive). Perhaps an email to mods is in order?
Why is it an interesting story?
for real. I'd like some answers.
It’s often cited that Twitter/X lost 80% of its value since Musk took over. Is this possible to confirm? If it’s private now, are there ways to judge its success or estimate its value?
Pre-Aquisition Twitter
$5 billion revenue
$682 million EBITDA
2024 X $2.7 billion revenue $1.25 billion EBITDA
Last week Alwaleed bin Talal a longtime Twitter and X investor said his holdings have held value after the acquisition and he considers it in the process of doubling. Some banks also reported selling their debt in 2024 for 97 cents on the dollar.
Interview: https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1887210068485009599
https://www.semafor.com/article/02/07/2025/musks-x-doubled-i...
2024 X $2.7 billion revenue $1.25 billion EBITDA
Last week Alwaleed bin Talal a longtime Twitter and X investor said his holdings have held value after the acquisition and he considers it in the process of doubling. Some banks also reported selling their debt in 2024 for 97 cents on the dollar.
Interview: https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1887210068485009599
https://www.semafor.com/article/02/07/2025/musks-x-doubled-i...
That 2021 figure is after a legal settlement. If you don’t include that, the EBITDA was $1.47 billion.
While this is true, (and I don't want to try to be politically neutral here), if we look at Elon's enormous increase in power and also significant increase in wealth, it would definately be positive ROI for him.
He went through a lot of stress thought being leveraged in the stock market crash.
He went through a lot of stress thought being leveraged in the stock market crash.
Where are you getting the $2.7 billion number? This article from Jan 30 says 1.2 billion: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/x-financials-under-musk-signa...
There were news reports last year that Fidelity marked down their equity holdings in X by over 70%.
They left because of fears about reputation damage, but since no one cares about reputations right now, there’s nothing to fear anymore. Might as well pick up a few additional sales.
Companies that have no political ideologies except to make as much money as they can, resume doing <insert whatever self serving behavior it is> the minute it’s profitable to do so.
There, I fixed the headlines for you.
There, I fixed the headlines for you.
The corollary is that advertising on X is now profitable for Apple. Which is useful information.
Of course companies put money before political ideology, as a public company, it can be considered an obligation to their shareholders. The part that matters is that their customers may have political ideologies, and it is important for a company to match the ideologies of the customers who make them the most money, at least in appearance.
Of course companies put money before political ideology, as a public company, it can be considered an obligation to their shareholders. The part that matters is that their customers may have political ideologies, and it is important for a company to match the ideologies of the customers who make them the most money, at least in appearance.
My uniformed guess is that this is profitable to Apple in the same way that money spent on lobbyists is profitable.
Yeah, bribing your industry's top regulator seems highly likely to have a positive ROI.
The world is healing.
Seriously though, I certainly don’t want my companies to have political ideologies. Follow the law, be good to customers and serve everyone.
Seriously though, I certainly don’t want my companies to have political ideologies. Follow the law, be good to customers and serve everyone.
This comment is so funny to me because obviously Apple is only returning to Twitter because of politics. Twitters owner is in the Whitehouse.
They advertised on Twitter before Musk bought it, which implies it was profitable. The platform is doing better than ever, so we can assume it’s still profitable today.
The only reason they left was politics.
The only reason they left was politics.
> The platform is doing better than ever
By which metric? Even Elon has admitted they're not making money.
By which metric? Even Elon has admitted they're not making money.
I don’t have all the metrics handy but I know traffic is constantly growing and at an all time high[0].
Revenue is down with the advertisers leaving but costs are down so much, I think it’s recently profitable or will be soon? And with advertising coming back on top of the new cost structure, it should be a cash cow.
[0] https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1821581350975189151?s=46
Revenue is down with the advertisers leaving but costs are down so much, I think it’s recently profitable or will be soon? And with advertising coming back on top of the new cost structure, it should be a cash cow.
[0] https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1821581350975189151?s=46
>I don’t have all the metrics handy but I know traffic is constantly growing and at an all time high
No that's not what Elon said and the tweet he was replying to is a nobody with zero data.
No that's not what Elon said and the tweet he was replying to is a nobody with zero data.
I'd say that this is pretty political[0]
[0] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-musk-antisemitic-comments-...
[0] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-musk-antisemitic-comments-...
Apple isn’t following the law right now either. They just brought TikTok back to the App Store based on Trump’s promises. But it is still breaking the law.
Apple never brought it back to the App Store. TikTok has to be sideloaded in the US: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqldw5y4y0no
I wonder of all the people who read this comment and also drove today, what percentage violated speeding laws.
The TikTok law was meant to force divesture to a US company. The Supreme Court ruled on the legality of it at the very last minute, so there is broad bipartisan support for more time to find an acquirer, including Biden saying he won't enforce it on the last day in office.
They know a lot of Americans depend on it for livelihood and entertainment.
The TikTok law was meant to force divesture to a US company. The Supreme Court ruled on the legality of it at the very last minute, so there is broad bipartisan support for more time to find an acquirer, including Biden saying he won't enforce it on the last day in office.
They know a lot of Americans depend on it for livelihood and entertainment.
And that was built into the law that if there was a potential buyer, it could be postponed. There is no potential buyer.
> They know a lot of Americans depend on it for livelihood and entertainment.
Yes because President Musk has showed real concerns about putting people out of work
> They know a lot of Americans depend on it for livelihood and entertainment.
Yes because President Musk has showed real concerns about putting people out of work
Agreed.
Have advertising rates on Twitter changed significantly over recent years? I wonder if that is a factor at all.
Well, most don't have an ideology.
Twitter does, though.
Twitter does, though.
It was profitable to do so a year ago, it was simply dangerous politically. Now given Trump is in office and aligned with Musk, it’s politically beneficial.
That seems to be the truth.
That seems to be the truth.
If anything it's politically dangerous not to advertise there.
> It was profitable to do so a year ago, it was simply dangerous politically.
Explain? Because if it was politically dangerous, it automatically means it wasn’t profitable.
Explain? Because if it was politically dangerous, it automatically means it wasn’t profitable.
If an activity is profitable but the government can prosecute you for taking place in that activity, there in no correlation. That’s the point.
Advertising was dangerous because there was a perception that the previous US government would politically prosecute anyone who opposed them. Companies advertising on X, and hence supporting opposition such as Musk, would fall into this category.
Advertising was dangerous because there was a perception that the previous US government would politically prosecute anyone who opposed them. Companies advertising on X, and hence supporting opposition such as Musk, would fall into this category.
There should be a law in place whereby if you a prove a company was engaged in profitable advertising or activities and stopped doing those activities in response to political stances the company can be prosecuted.
Not sure where this would fit into the law though something like this would certainly curtail cancel culture like activity.
Not sure where this would fit into the law though something like this would certainly curtail cancel culture like activity.
Companies also have first amendment rights.
It'd also be blatantly unconstitutional.
You’re going to make a company work with another company?
The inverse: ensure companies that are already working with companies are not leaving them for illegitimate reasons.
Who decides what reasons are legitimate?
Great question. I don’t have a good answer.
Could a be a “facts and circumstances” type of legislation similar to the IRS. Many IRS rules go back to the “facts and circumstances” of a particular case to evaluate all the nuances relating to it.
Could a be a “facts and circumstances” type of legislation similar to the IRS. Many IRS rules go back to the “facts and circumstances” of a particular case to evaluate all the nuances relating to it.
I'm still not clear why you think this would be a good idea. Obviously you have opinions on what is "legitimate" in these situations. Can you explain more about this and how it wouldn't be a first ammendment violation to create such a law?
What "facts and circumstances" are we interested in? Your original post mentioned ending business relationships due to political stances. Did you mean the political stance of the advertisers, the platform hosting ads, some third party or parties, a combination of the above, or something I've missed?
What "facts and circumstances" are we interested in? Your original post mentioned ending business relationships due to political stances. Did you mean the political stance of the advertisers, the platform hosting ads, some third party or parties, a combination of the above, or something I've missed?
Unless they are refusing to cook a cake for a gay couple…
Look up “no duty to deal”.
Look up “no duty to deal”.
[flagged]
I think it boils down to the fact that intelligent, curious discussion on topics like this can’t be held on the internet.
Even on HN, the comments on the previous threads, and already in this thread too, are getting downvoted and flagged (mine will soon follow, I’m sure).
Politics is an internet trigger. It can draw out the worst in even the most otherwise civil people.
Even on HN, the comments on the previous threads, and already in this thread too, are getting downvoted and flagged (mine will soon follow, I’m sure).
Politics is an internet trigger. It can draw out the worst in even the most otherwise civil people.
> I think it boils down to the fact that intelligent, curious discussion on topics like this can’t be held on the internet.
They definitely can be. Usually, moderators dont want to deal with the shit slinging that comes with them though, and many intelligent people are too sensitive to allow bigotry and hateful comments to be allowed to be hosted.
I miss the old days where anything goes, and if you don't like it just close the browser. Better than censorship and sanitization.
They definitely can be. Usually, moderators dont want to deal with the shit slinging that comes with them though, and many intelligent people are too sensitive to allow bigotry and hateful comments to be allowed to be hosted.
I miss the old days where anything goes, and if you don't like it just close the browser. Better than censorship and sanitization.
eh, we've been getting super-political when the discussions aligned with the establishment. This is tech-bros kissing the ring. We are living in the unfortunate timeline where one waits for China to save the day.
The left can’t understand people exist with a different view point or even fathom the concept that they could be wrong.
One day maybe you will recognize that generalizations are shortcuts your brain uses to avoid having to spend energy thinking.
“it’s a different point of view” is not a panacea for making immoral behavior moral
The combined fandom of Elon Musk and Apple is a force to be reckoned with.
WahG129ah(2)
Cook is a smart man. Showed up at Trump's inauguration after paying $1 million. Advertising back on X so they have some leverage to prevent damaging tariffs and sanctions that would impact Apple's manufacturing in China.
Not surprising.
Economic war is coming between the EU and US companies once Trump imposes tariffs.
And Apple needs Trump and Musk as allies rather than enemies.
Economic war is coming between the EU and US companies once Trump imposes tariffs.
And Apple needs Trump and Musk as allies rather than enemies.
> Musk clearly learned his lesson. Since then, he’s been lying low, out of the public eye, and refraining from any sort of controversial statements or actions. He barely even tweets anymore.
Is this satire? I honestly can’t tell.
Is this satire? I honestly can’t tell.
Satire. He rarely criticizes apple directly, but I think he’s mindful that it’s required for Apple in the current politics to not become a target.
I honestly can’t understand how you think this might not be satire. Musk has been lying low, out of the public eye, avoiding controversy? Barely tweeting?
If you can’t tell that is satire then you owe it to yourself to keep
better informed about current events.
[deleted]
The original comment by gnabgib was flagged after a while, so I will post it again for those who come later. I think this comment will be flagged soon. I don’t know why some people don’t want this news to spread.
Two previous discussions were flagged as well:
[1] Apple Resumes Advertising on X | 44 points by greyadept 23 hours ago | 49 comments | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43032112
[2] Apple is once again advertising on X, more than a year after stopping all ads | 76 points by ksec 1 day ago | 38 comments | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43031493
Two previous discussions were flagged as well:
[1] Apple Resumes Advertising on X | 44 points by greyadept 23 hours ago | 49 comments | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43032112
[2] Apple is once again advertising on X, more than a year after stopping all ads | 76 points by ksec 1 day ago | 38 comments | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43031493
This site is not about just any news anyone wants to hear about, there is a focus behind it. And honestly the reason I frequent this website is specifically because political garbage is usually down voted, flagged or removed fairly quickly as it typically just causes flame wars with no actual actionable things and nothing of value is learned from it.
Could I tag @dang moderator for asking removing flag?
Tagging / @mentions don't trigger anything unless a mod happens to see it (which is rare / unlikely, given the volume of posts every day). However, you can email the staff: [email protected].
Be sure to include your reasoning for what is wrong with or unfair about the tag and why the story warrants special treatment.
Be sure to include your reasoning for what is wrong with or unfair about the tag and why the story warrants special treatment.
bamboozled(3)
m3kw9(1)
This is good.
The truly worst websites are usually only found with a .tor browser. If Apple started advertising on Stormfront I'll get concerned, but right now X has fantastic discussion for ML devs and shows me stuff like this: https://x.com/Brittymigs/status/1889708756851634439
Opponents probably aren't using the site. Or have a fervor for something else and misdirecting it towards X.
The truly worst websites are usually only found with a .tor browser. If Apple started advertising on Stormfront I'll get concerned, but right now X has fantastic discussion for ML devs and shows me stuff like this: https://x.com/Brittymigs/status/1889708756851634439
Opponents probably aren't using the site. Or have a fervor for something else and misdirecting it towards X.
Or have a fervor for something else and misdirecting it towards X.
Not allowed to have an alternate opinion anymore hey ?
It's interesting to me how the whole MAGA / Elon absolute "free speech" has now become the opposite of what it started out to be in favor of :)
Not allowed to have an alternate opinion anymore hey ?
It's interesting to me how the whole MAGA / Elon absolute "free speech" has now become the opposite of what it started out to be in favor of :)
It's always been "we want to have the right to drown out your speech" - it hasn't flipped.
I too remember that old slogan: "it's a private platform".
It's still the same, you're welcome to express it, and it's useful for finding those who've swallowed millennial psy-ops without a glass of water.
So not beliving in "The DOGE" means you've been had by millennial "psy-ops"? Seems hilarious but ok.
no. You aren't even on topic. Aren't coders supposed to be smart? You can't even correctly model me, god forbid you try to understand your political opponents.
Am I betting on a red 2028? If people like you keep at it, I will.
Be better.
Am I betting on a red 2028? If people like you keep at it, I will.
Be better.
Lay off the special K bud.
It's interesting to see Gruber repeatedly mocking Apple's CEO. I also find it curious that so many in the tech blog / news sphere can't stop denouncing everything to do with the new administration. To me it seems like a sort of signaling "I will not bend, I have integrity", when in fact they are just being ignorant.
[deleted]
Ignorant of what? Everyone knows what Trump and Musk have been doing. That's why people are denouncing them.
(41 points, 23 hours ago, 48 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43032112