I’ve always wondered: When companies decide they need to look good for investors, it means to be clean and non-controversial. Why is this? Are investors old and out of touch or something?
They have to look good to advertisers. And the megacorps of the world need to be sure their brands are not associated with anything “controversial” so they can appeal to as many Americans as possible.
Which makes no sense! I know they don’t have any bills, but they also have no income either! Is the tooth fairy and grandparents birthday money REALLY funding the ecconomy???
I suspect this is satire but in case its not. Its not the children themselves that are paying, its the parent that pays for whatever their critters demand.
Basically they want to reach as wide as possible, so they tend to clear out or lock any controversy content behind something, even to the point of being ball-less and/or pro-fascism.
Oh, they love controversial content. If they can put ads on it. Engagement and hatewatching are great for an ad business.
It just can’t be formatted in a way advertisers want to avoid or regulators want to regulate. The result leads to very weird, very toxic patterns of content and nobody wants to fix it (or has any particularly effective ideas about how).
Investors tend to be extemely risk averse, so the slightest little thing might scare them off. Even if they decide to take the chance anyway, they still want it to be as clean as possible, to minimizing the risk.
Even the slightest improvement may increase the investment by millions, or even billions, of dollars, so it’s worth the trouble.
First of all, who’s your AnR? A mountain climber that plays and electric gitarr? But eh don’t know the meaning of dope when he’s looking for suit 'n tie rap that cleaner than a bar of soap.
I’ve always wondered: When companies decide they need to look good for investors, it means to be clean and non-controversial. Why is this? Are investors old and out of touch or something?
They have to look good to advertisers. And the megacorps of the world need to be sure their brands are not associated with anything “controversial” so they can appeal to as many Americans as possible.
I believe the consensus is that the most profitable target market are children and young teens.
Which makes no sense! I know they don’t have any bills, but they also have no income either! Is the tooth fairy and grandparents birthday money REALLY funding the ecconomy???
Oh…no, that actually makes sense.
I suspect this is satire but in case its not. Its not the children themselves that are paying, its the parent that pays for whatever their critters demand.
18-34. They have a little money from their first jobs, and they tend to spend it.
Basically they want to reach as wide as possible, so they tend to clear out or lock any controversy content behind something, even to the point of being ball-less and/or pro-fascism.
Oh, they love controversial content. If they can put ads on it. Engagement and hatewatching are great for an ad business.
It just can’t be formatted in a way advertisers want to avoid or regulators want to regulate. The result leads to very weird, very toxic patterns of content and nobody wants to fix it (or has any particularly effective ideas about how).
Yes.
Investors tend to be extemely risk averse, so the slightest little thing might scare them off. Even if they decide to take the chance anyway, they still want it to be as clean as possible, to minimizing the risk.
Even the slightest improvement may increase the investment by millions, or even billions, of dollars, so it’s worth the trouble.
First of all, who’s your AnR? A mountain climber that plays and electric gitarr? But eh don’t know the meaning of dope when he’s looking for suit 'n tie rap that cleaner than a bar of soap.