Following the acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk, many companies have paused or stopped their advertising campaigns. A report from Media Matters for America said that over half of Twitter’s top 100 advertisers are no longer advertising on the platform.
In September, Twitter promoted ads alongside child pornography. Some of the brands called Twitter out on this and either paused or suspended their ad campaigns.
Some advertisers that were not affected by Twitter’s accidental promotion of ads with child pornography continued to advertise with the platform. And some of these brands who did so paused their campaigns when Elon Musk took over.
A key issue is that in the past, Twitter has been lenient toward child predators, yet advertisers have been advertising with the platform for many years.
It wasn’t until Elon Musk bought the platform that Twitter made removing child sexual exploitation material priority number one. Some of these advertisers are only now pausing or suspending their ad campaigns after Elon Musk took over.
Removing child exploitation is priority #1. Please reply in comments if you see anything that Twitter needs to address.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 24, 2022
A Twitter spokesperson said that the platform “has zero tolerance for child sexual exploitation,” but there is a case where the platform refused to remove videos of two children being abused, and it took the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to step in for Twitter to remove the content.
The Media Matters report stated that Elon Musk “has continued his rash of brand unsafe actions — including amplifying conspiracy theories, unilaterally reinstating banned accounts such as that of former President Donald Trump, courting and engaging with far-right accounts, and instituting a haphazard verification scheme that allowed extremists and scammers to purchase a blue check. This last move, in particular, opened the platform up to various fraud and brand imitations.”
There was no mention of Twitter’s new priority number one, which is the removal of child pornography from its platform. Additionally, many of these brands continued to advertise while Trump was president and active on the platform.
Comparison.
The two following lists show companies that stopped advertising when Elon Musk took over and companies whose ads were published alongside explicit and illegal content.
Companies That Stopped Publishing Ads When Elon Musk Bought Twitter:
- Abbott Laboratories
- Allstate Corporation
- AMC Networks
- American Express Company
- AT&T
- Big Heart Petcare
- BlackRock, Inc.
- BlueTriton Brands, Inc.
- Boston Beer Company
- CA Lottery (California State Lottery)
- CenturyLink (Lumen Technologies, Inc.)
- Chanel
- Chevrolet
- Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.
- Citigroup, Inc.
- CNN
- Dell
- Diageo
- DirecTV
- Discover Financial Services
- Fidelity
- First National Realty Partners
- Ford
- Heineken N.V.
- Hewlett-Packard (HP)
- Hilton Worldwide
- Inspire Brands, Inc.
- Jeep
- Kellogg Company
- Kohl’s Department Stores, Inc.
- Kyndryl
- LinkedIn Corporation
- MailChimp (The Rocket Science Group)
- Marriott International, Inc.
- Mars Petcare
- Mars, Incorporated
- Merck & Co. (Merck Sharp & Dohme MSD)*
- Meta Platforms, Inc. (formerly Facebook, Inc.)
- MoneyWise (Wise Publishing, Inc.)
- Nestle
- Novartis AG
- Pernod Ricard
- PlayPass
- The Coca-Cola Company
- The Kraft Heinz Company
- Tire Rack
- Verizon
- Wells Fargo
- Whole Foods Market IP
- Yum! Brands
Brands whose ads Twitter promoted alongside CSE Content.
There were over 30 brands affected, and the following list is just some of the brands that were reported to be affected.
- Dyson
- Mazda
- Forbes
- Walt Disney
- NBC Universal
- Coca-Cola
- Cole Haan
- a children’s hospital
- PBS Kids
A spokesperson for both Disney and Coca-Cola spoke out against Twitter promoting their ads alongside the CSE content, yet NBCUniversal confirmed that it asked Twitter to remove the ads associated with the content.
David Maddocks, brand president at Cole Haan, told Reuters that either Twitter fixes this or Cole Haan would do so, including by not buying Twitter ads. Mazda USA also said it would be prohibiting its ads from appearing on Twitter profile pages.
Although a handful of brands were upset over Twitter’s promoting ads along CSE, many of those brands that quit Twitter following Elon Musk’s acquisition were advertising up until recently. This includes both brands who had their content promoted alongside child pornography as well as those who didn’t.
For all of these brands who continued to advertise despite Twitter’s problem with CSE, the question remains: is advertising with Elon Musk worse than alongside the exploitation of children?
This is a question Eliza Bleu had for General Motors when the automaker first suspended its campaign after Elon Musk’s acquisition of the platform. Bleu is one of Twitter’s toughest critics who, up until recently, Twitter ignored. Elon Musk agrees with Bleu that CSE should be removed from the platform and has made it priority number one.
I would like to know too
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 23, 2022
“Twitter has a long history of knowingly refusing to remove child sexual abuse material at scale. This issue has been covered by the corporate media and called out by governments around the globe.”
“Over 32 brands removed ads from Twitter when the Reuters pieces came out in September of this year because of child sexual abuse material on Twitter. I think that General Motors’ lack of concern over sexually abused children says a lot. Survivors buy cars too. There are more survivors out there than these brands might think,” Bleu told Teslarati in October.
Bleu told Teslarati on Sunday that these brands only care about the world’s most vulnerable when it is politically advantageous.
“Where was the outrage, pearl-clutching, and solidarity for the minor survivors sexually exploited on Twitter over the past 10+ years?”
“These brands only care about the world’s most vulnerable when it’s politically advantageous. They only care about the vulnerable populations who buy products, vote, and have money. It’s manipulative and gaslighting.”
“Thank you to the brands who took a stand against Twitter in September over this very real crime. My hope is that under the new leadership, the platform will continue to prioritize the removal of child sexual exploitation, and the brands that left in September can return knowing that specific issue will not negatively impact their brand as well as children around the globe.”
The question remains: Which is worse for Twitter advertisers: child sexual exploitation or Elon Musk?
Your feedback is welcome. If you have any comments or concerns or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter at @JohnnaCrider1.
Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. You can also follow Teslarati on LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
