3 words: The Chevron Ad. It links to an astroturf website whose purpose is to discourage California voters from supporting increased regulations of climate changing gases.
My explanation is on the flip.
During the past several weeks, there have been several very substantive diaries by regular, low-user-ID kossacks who are deeply concerned that this website has become a staging ground for big oil propaganda.
In their comments sections, these diaries produced a few well-reasoned and interesting exchanges.
But mostly the diaries were met by ad hominem attacks on the diarists and by one fallacial argument after another accusing the diarists of hating capitalism (I saw less than zero evidence of that), suppressing free speech (I saw much more defense of a mega corporation's right to free speech than of the diarists' rights to free speech), and being hypocritical ("If you drive a car, why shouldn't Markos advertise for Chevron?"), among many other things.
One of my favorite false claims was that Markos needs money from the Chevron ad ad to keep DK online. Anyone who knows anything about web advertising (and I do) knows that this is laughable for such a popular and audience specific website.
But by far the most laughable claim was that the Chevron ad is a "waste of money" for Chevron because no kossack is going to be convinced by the ad to buy more gas (that's not even the ad's purpose) or to support Chevron's policy positions. Wrong. If Chevron didn't think that this ad was helping changing some kossacks' minds at least to some extent, believe me, they wouldn't be spending the money to put it here. Advertising works, notwithstanding the fact that we all think it doesn't work on us. That's why it's a billions of dollars per year industry that thousands of business and physchology professors around the world are still trying to understand.
It's worth noting that at least two polls asking readers their opinions about the Chevron ad produced nearly even splits, with about half of all respondents wishing for the ads to be removed, and the other half not caring that much. (Sample sizes were quite large in both cases.)
So maybe the number of negative comments posted in opposition to the anti-Chevron diarists exaggerated the number of all DK readers who support the ads.
In any case, the ads remain, because ultimately it isn't any diaris or commentator that can change that. Only Markos can remove the ad, because this is his website, as so many commentators have pointed out.
Markos is fond of speaking truth to power, both within our own party and outside. Videos such as the one he posted last week of that brave soldier's mom confronting Senator Allen with hard questions demonstrate this. Markos's frank criticisms--and demands--of old-style Democratic leaders in "Crashing the Gate" demonstrate it.
Well, here's a truth. Continued use of oil and other hydrocarbons is causing the biggest environmental changes and probably the largest mass species extinctions that this planet has seen in 60 million years. And the ad that Markos is allowing to be placed on top of this website for about 100,000 visitors to see everyday is part of a multi-million dollar public relations campaign by Chevon and other big oil companies to suppress voter support for policies to address that monumental problem.
Quite a number of kossacks have brought this truth to Markos's attention, and like Senator Allen, Markos has refused to respond in any meaningful way. He has continued to run the ad, and he hasn't responded to a single one of the diaries that I have seen. I call that hypocritical and not in keeping with the kind of "leadership" I wish to see in charge of the Democratic party or any large constituency of the Democratic party.
Some people will no doubt say that leaving DK is "giving up" or whatever, but they should note that I did try hard to address this issue internally by posting two diaries and contributing to friendly, well-reasoned arguments in variou comments sections. Now I've had enough.
How many of the people who are about to flame me think that Al Gore would support DK running the Chevron ad? (I don't think he would.)
How many of the people who are about to flame me are willing to wait around until Lieberman finally learns to address their issues, before they decided to support Lamont? (I wasn't willing to wait around.)