Nom nom nom nom livejournal nom...

May 03, 2009 13:55

Uh oh.

While quietly tinkering in the Workshop of Mayhem I sensed a disturbance in the LJ Force. Actually, I was just hungry, but during my break for lunch, I discovered this:


Read more... )

religion, nom, activism, lj, gay marriage, advertising, right wing idiocy, marriage

Leave a comment

Comments 21

(The comment has been removed)

greatbearmd May 3 2009, 18:25:19 UTC
Fixed. I had the ad on my own server, but it's name was such that it would trip some ad filters. I changed it up a bit so it would not happen to others.

I use a very fine-tuned adblocker, so I rarely encounter ads, pop-ups and whatnot unless I want to. I would never have seen this ad, and it would not have shown up in my LJ since it's a permanent account. But others using the enhanced ad-supported free model and surfers from outside LJ not blocking ads would be subjected to this.

Reply


djmadadam May 3 2009, 18:19:22 UTC
Yikes!

But, LOL nebris.

Reply

greatbearmd May 3 2009, 18:28:41 UTC
Credit where credit's due. I found out from him first, and probably would not have discovered this at all otherwise. There's a few good links between the LJ drama, war machinery and snatch 'n' titty pix. ;)

Reply


ciddyguy May 3 2009, 20:07:05 UTC
Wow. I didn't read much of the comments from the post itself but man, some people are quick to jump to conclusions here, saying LJ is in bed with...

It would be interesting to see what happens in the morning. I have a paid account and thus don't see any of the ads. Can we definitively say SUP allowed this or do the ads just appear as promised and the content is not up for discussion? That would be good to find out, especially if provided by a 3rd party provider. It appears to be from the No on Marriage group.

Reply

Staff comment marta May 4 2009, 00:31:21 UTC
I'm sorry to comment over here, so many apologies if this is out of place - I've been looking around for more information on where this ad might have popped up. However, I wanted to answer your question regarding 3rd party providers.

I've got a little longer explanation over here, but, yes, we can and do filter any ads served by providers like Google. This one has been very difficult to track down and we've added some additional criteria so that hopefully this ad, and others like it, won't end up in rotation in the future.

I'm really sorry that this ad appeared today.

Reply

Re: Staff comment ciddyguy May 4 2009, 01:20:28 UTC
Thanks for your reply. It does me and others good to know that this is being looked at.

I hadn't said it anywhere else but it had occured to me that these people probably snuck it in somewhere w/out your knowledge. these ultra conservatives will do anything, even if it means going through the backdoor to get their message out.

They are a sneaky bunch.

Reply

Re: Staff comment jimmyadventure May 4 2009, 03:00:02 UTC
Wow! Really offensive. I'm surprised and disappointed.

Reply


furrbear May 3 2009, 20:47:56 UTC
Getting a LOT of conservatard ads in RSS feeds such as DailyKos, AmericaBlog, and Crooks&Liars, got me to update and tune AdBlock. I don't see these ads any longer.

The big thing I learned in the process is that SUP isn't choosing the ads, they look to be being inserted from Google.

I know it's popular to invoke Drama on SUP, but beyond opting for ads in the first place, I don't believe they select the ads. Although, I do think they could/should work with Google to remove obviously offensive ad choices.

Reply

qnetter May 3 2009, 20:56:41 UTC
If you're running ads and accept whatever comes up from your "agency" (i.e., Google), you're responsible. You can't just outsource the responsibility. A real business with real ethics sells its own ads and manages whose ads it will carry and whose it will not.

Reply

pklexton May 4 2009, 17:37:40 UTC
Yes they are ultimtately responsible, but I thought her responses were good, at least at face value. I suspect trying to get them to disconnect all automated ads may not be realistic as a business proposition.

Reply

qnetter May 4 2009, 18:09:11 UTC
Sorry -- you have to figure out what it costs to run your business ethically and responsibly, and base your business model on that. Any print publication that ran an unacceptable ad and tried to explain it by saying "we gave our inbound ad agency the page flats and guidelines, and they pasted up the ads -- we have no responsibility" wouldn't get away with it -- we shouldn't accept "it's Google's fault" either.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

greatbearmd May 5 2009, 00:52:38 UTC
Ya know, that's a cool idea. Preemptive ad placement! And for the best cause too. I wish I was so creative with the graphics.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up