I have some thoughts on this. https://twitter.com/kristinamonllos/status/1347187477099008001
Once again, a bad thing has happened and the first things brands do is block the “emergency negative news” category or pause their online spend altogether.

This makes it IMPOSSIBLE for news outlets to recoup the costs on providing you w/ quality, fact-checked reporting.
This destructive habit had become common practice in the last 4 years under the leadership of agency folks like this, who will claim that advertising on “bad news” may harm their brand.

Wrong. The only thing it harms is our news media ecosystem. Is that what you want?
Think about it. Brands don’t pause their ads on Anderson Cooper’s show when he talks about negative news.

Why are they so pressed about their online spend? Especially when none of them know where their ads are running on a daily basis anyway?
The only people who benefit from selling the idea that advertising on “bad news” is harmful to advertisers is

a.) adtech companies trying to create a market for “contextual intelligence” products
b.) agencies who are trying to stay relevant

Don’t listen to them! Fund the news!
You can follow @nandoodles.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
Those who think consciousness raising & movement building are disconnected, or even a distraction from electoral politics have not paid attention to the history of social change.In this thread, we
Read more
The 2020s will be known as the Remote Work decadeA few predictions of what is likely to emerge[ a thread ] Third Space: Office and Working from Home will
Read more
1/29: Have you ever had a concept explained to you that helps frame complex issues you’ve been wrestling with and opens your eyes to new possibilities? A concept that I
Read more
By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.