What we’re reading (6/27)
Some fresh finds:
“The Hard Truth About Facebook Ad Boycott: Nothing Matters But Zuckerberg” (CNN). Some heavy ad spenders want Facebook to regulate speech on it’s platform with a heavier hand. As an aside, one can’t help but think some of Facebook’s rival media platforms (of the traditional TV and print sort) agree based on their coverage, which, by the way, is a peculiar position for those outlets to adopt—since when does the press want opinion and information to be more, rather than less, tightly restricted? In any case, it’s tough to imagine the reduced ad spend at FB being anything more than opportunistic and temporary. Given COVID, a lot of brands need to cut their ad budgets. The economics of cutting at Facebook, rather than elsewhere, have improved a little recently: given the collective aversion to “wrongspeak” in certain cultural confines at the moment, the pain of cutting at FB is little offset by the value of the virtue signal to said clienteles. As evidence for the proposition that this is really about ad budgets and not about taking a principled stand against misinformation on digital media platforms, note that Unilever also cut its ad spend on Twitter, which is actually on the “rightspeak” side of things here, and TWTR was down just about as much as FB on Friday.
“Can Consumers Sustain A Spending Splurge? (Wall Street Journal). The April boost in personal income “will likely be one-off” as aid programs expire without Congressional approval of new assistance and the improvements in unemployment claims have been “sluggish,” signaling slim prospects for a quick recovery.
“Brokers Will Have to Tell You a Lot More About What They Are Advising You to Buy Starting Next Week” (CNBC). Regulation “Best Interest” goes into effect 6/30, requiring your broker-dealer (the people who buy and sell securities on your behalf) to…get this…”act in the best interest of their clients and to identify conflicts of interest, including financial incentives they may have with the products they are selling.” Seems like this reg probably should have already been in place. Would’ve thought the Panic of 1907 would’ve yielded some rules like this, but I guess it took another 11 decades. In any case, a welcomed development.
“Regulators Unceremoniously Dump Volcker Rule Into Crude Ditch Next to its Author” (Dealbreaker). More on the financial regulatory front: “There’s no time like a financial crisis even worse than the last one to gut the signature regulation stemming from said previous financial crisis, or so it seems to those in charge of enforcing it, who have finalized the demolition of the Volcker Rule at a time when very little else is going [on].”
“Pros And Cons Of D.C. Statehood” (The Onion). On the pro side, “[c]onfers all the benefits of having state bird.” On the other hand, “[s]lippery slope to giving statehood to Delaware.”
