Please be aware that I do not endorse any of the products being advertised by Proximic at the bottom of the side bar on the right. I am responsible for the content of the side bar on the left and, of course, for all of the written material on this blog, but I have no control over the products that appear in the "Related Ads", or, for that matter, anything in the column on the right.
If I had my way, the Proximic ads would be removed altogether, because they look very tacky and, more importantly, they advertise rubbish such as the Neurology & Psychology of Masculinity audio cassette, by one Dr. Philip Mango, who is associated with a dubious-sounding organization called the National Forum on the Theology of the Body.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
I suppose I have to say something about the Great Pepsi Blog Controversy, because it's sucking all the oxygen out of science blogging right now. I'll try to keep this short and self-contained.
At this time, I have no intention of leaving ScienceBlogs over the paid PepsiCo blog. I'm very sorry to…
It's taken me a few hours to cool off enough to write coherently and without using (too much) profanity after I learned that ScienceBlogs added a corporate PR "blog" about nutrition written by PepsiCo. I think I've learned all I care to know about corporate "food" giants' definition of what is "…
Mark Butterworth has responded to my post on his own blog with his thoughts on what he sees as an inevitable civil war. He says:
I'm trying to recall the circumstances which first prompted my musings on a future civil war. I believe that it was in watching the Democrats attack the Republicans in…
Quite a few readers have been writing with questions regarding my hospitalization. For awhile, I was writing private email to those who wrote, telling you the highlights (or perhaps I should refer to them as "lowlights"?) of those events that have transpired over the previous 100 days. I will tell…
I don't go around suggesting software to people (let alone OSs), but Flashblock means I don't even see those ads...
Good point Ridger. I forget to suggest that readers who have not already done so might like to install some ad block software.
Another solution is to use Firefox with the Adblock Plus and NoScript add-ons. As The Ridger, I didn't even know what you were talking about until I turned them off.
Vonnegut told us that the Tralfamadorians communicate by tapdancing and farting. So does the advertising industry.
Aren't the ads in the right sidebar how you make money from your blog?
If you don't "endorse" the ads, doesn't principle dictate that you don't accept the revenue?
One more thing: Is it really ethical to accept ad revenue after suggesting to your readers that they use ad-blocking software?
I didn't understand what you're talking about, and then I remembered... Firefox. yeah. :)
Funny, but my ads are about solid cherry wrap-around bars (as in for the dispensing of alcohol), sunglasses, and Verizon phones.
Our cookies tell all about our tastes..... (or whatever the thingy is that Proximic reads to determine what we might be interested in).
Anthony: I don't receive any of the revenue generated by the ads, and I see nothing wrong with telling readers that I don't endorse them, because I want to dissociate myself as much as I can from the products.
Mo: Anthony didn't challenge you on the ethics of announcing you don't endorse the products. He specifically was concerned about you suggesting that your readers use ad blocking software.
And although you receive no revenue from the ads directly, presumably you entered into an agreement with ScienceBlogs in which you a) understood and agreed that they would place ads along the top, right, and bottom of the page; and b) determined that you benefitted sufficiently from the arrangement to allow them to do so.
So the questions is whether you're getting the benefit while also seeking to undermine ScieceBlog's benefit.
The way I see it, Anthony's is a moot point, because my miniscule renumeration hasn't change since the ads were placed. Plus, I wasn't the one who brought up ad blocking, and I would not have, had it not been for the first comment.
Personally, I think it's quite alright to speak up against those ads. Maybe the people who run scienceblogs will at least consider thinking about whether these ads really suit scienceblogs.
Another user of NoScript and AdBlock here. However, I suspect a polite complaint to the SEED Overlords would get the offenders booted off the Scienceblogs site rotation PDQ.
It is perfectly correct to speak out against the ads since the reality is that you do not endorse them and nor are you responsble for them. So it is right to say so lest there be any confusion.
Raiko agreed. If enough sciencebloggers speak out, then perhaps that particular arrangement would be looked at more closely.
David: the SEED people insist on keeping the ads, despite many complaints.