how’s that not a fucking ad
Because ads are made by a company in order for that company to sell a product that they own. This an independent article about a product so that consumer can learn about said product. You can tell that it’s not an ad by reading more than the headline.
Did you read the article? Excerpts include:
Generally, in business, it is sensible to provide your customers with what they want. With Twitter, the meme-makers’ favourite billionaire is doing the opposite. The cyber-trucker is trying his best to cull his customer base.
Threads is what would happen if Twitter and Instagram made out in a bowling alley. It’s all their worst parts combined - but it may well succeed. Rocket-man Musk’s changes to Twitter have not exactly made it ‘brand friendly’. Threads, meanwhile, is shaping up to be a paradise for in-your-face brands - and the AdTech industry would love for you to join them
and
Threads’ naffness won’t stop its success. It’s data-scraping fluffily dressed up as substandard corporate twaddle. It’s a cringe-inducing privacy invasion. It’s not meant for users, but that doesn’t really matter: you’re not a user, you’re a product.
It’s describing Threads as a product not for users, but advertisers. The perfect brand-friendly non-place for companies to stick their marketing crap. That doesn’t really come across as a ringing endorsement to me.
the post was deleted about 5 sec after i wrote it but it seem it didn’t got deleted in other istances
