Skip to main content

There was some pre-election controversy over my running a Chevron ad. (It may still be running, for all I know.)

I avoided talking about it then to prevent an ill-timed pie war. But given the increased interest in advertising on the site by interests that may sometimes not be aligned with the goals of the site, I had to figure out an official ad policy. And I found it over at The Nation:

Although the relationship of the First Amendment to commercial advertising is complex, we start with strong presumption against banning advertisers because we disapprove of, or even abhor, their political or social views. But we reserve (and exercise) the right to attack them in our editorial columns.

The Nation does not consider itself bound by standards that must be applied to just any public forum. Our pages are primarily given over to articles that are consistent with the views of the editors. While we also publish articles and letters from readers that diverge from, or even diametrically contradict, the views of the editors, this is not out of a sense that our pages should be open to all or because we believe we are obliged to achieve balance. Whatever we publish appears in the magazine because in our judgment the views expressed deserve to be called to the attention of our readers by us. We are a magazine of limited circulation that enjoys no monopoly on the attention of our readers. They obtain other views in other places, and, through that process, determine for themselves what views to accept or reject.

Advertising is different. We accept it not to further the views of The Nation but to help pay the costs of publishing. We start, therefore, with the presumption that we will accept advertising even if the views expressed are repugnant to those of the editors. The only limits are those that grow out of our interest in assuring that the advertising does not impede our use of the editorial columns of The Nation to say what we want [...]

In imposing such limits, we will refrain from making judgments based on our opinions of the particular views expressed in an advertisement. If the purpose of the advertisement is to sell a product or service rather than to express a view, we will allow ourselves greater rein in making judgments about suitability. This reflects our view that commerce is less sacrosanct than political speech [...]

Clearly, the whole question is a matter of drawing fine lines and making nice distinctions. Ethics and practicality are interwoven throughout the substance of the issue of how to enable journals of opinion to survive and expand their reach. We do not pretend that troublesome problems are absent from this question.

Running an ad doesn't imply endorsement. But, if I start rejecting ads, THEN every ad that DOES run has an implied endorsement.

And you guys aren't idiots. The advertising purity trolls seem to think that site readers are moron automatons easily manipulated by advertising. I have a higher opinion of you guys. I actually think you're quite intelligent and capable of independent evaluation of the advertising you consume here and elsewhere.

Finally, I'm not afraid of money, and I'm putting it to good use -- the abandonment of Scoop and a massive ground-up redevelopment of Daily Kos to be the ultimate blogging platform in the world, and the establishment of a corps of "fellows" to do great activism.

More details on those projects will emerge in December, but bottom line is that I won't cry if Chevron or anyone else wants to help fund the rise of a professional netroots activist class.

The Nation's guidelines are fair all around and so I'm stealing them for myself.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:14 AM PST.

Tags

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  Good policy (24+ / 0-)

      I like the part about how rejecting ads implies an endorsement of those that aren't.

      I also like the idea (unstated) of engaging corporate America to come along on our quest, rather than paint ourselves their enemy.

      •  And As I've said before (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        redlami, fumie, mariva

        Just about ANY ad should be accepted no matter who its from (short of say Nambla or The Aryan Front) If the RNC and NRA and the Moral Majority and Focus on the Family want to spend their ad dollars we should, By god, let them, and even encourage them by promoting massive click through.   Why?

        Because  a)I'm a big believer in Free speech and B)Every Dollar spent here among an audicence wildly unrecpetive to thier message is a Dollar they DON"t have to spend among the more guillible and easily converted.

        DailyKos is the proverbial "Rocky ground" for conservative causes and Large corporations proclaiming Faux good citizenship and environemntalism.  If our opponents foolishly want to scatter thier seed here, it just that much less they have left for more fertile soil.

        Knowledge is power Power Corrupts Study Hard Be Evil

        by Magorn on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:46:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  World Domination! (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Magorn, Elise, mariva, vox humana

          I knew it!

          ...a massive ground-up redevelopment of Daily Kos to be the ultimate blogging platform in the world

          The Kingpin has plans...

          This is CLASS WAR, and the other side is winning.

          by Mr X on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:52:26 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  What Next??? (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Magorn, ZappoDave, GiveNoQuarter, sfRenter

          Political ads from Republicans claiming to be Democrats?

          How about a banner at the top claiming to be the Official Democratic Voter Guide (paid for by the RCCC)?

          Where is there a line? Is there a line?

          Oh the almighty dollar!!!

          "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

          by talex on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:08:50 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Depends (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JWC, NCrefugee, mariva

            My lines are these:  We should not give Voice to the deservedly Voiceless (NAMBLA, Aryan Nation Holocaust deniers, etc) Scammers (send $1 dollar to) or those on our side so ethically challenged to give Kos and Kossacks a bad name by association (re-elect William Jefferson).

            An offical "democratic" voter guide would be dancing on the edge of the fraud exception for me, but an RNC banner ad?  Why the hell not?  its not going to hange any minds here but it will drain thier coffers

            I once had a friend who found himself managing the  Web Advertising account for the NDCPA (national Drug Control Policy agency) even though he was very strongly pro-legalization.  His act of "civil disobedience" was to place these ads (which he considered illegal government propaganda)  with Sites like Erowid and Project Dance Safe, where he figured the average viewer would be too smart to fall for the ad's BS claims.

            I'd argue a similar dynamic is in play here.  The average Kossack is too smart to  believe that Kweisi MFume woud EVER endorse Michael Steele for anything.  The same cannot be said for the average WaPo or MSNBC reader.  So where would YOU rather have the Ads?

            Knowledge is power Power Corrupts Study Hard Be Evil

            by Magorn on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:19:30 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Policy? (0+ / 0-)
        What policy?

        That isn't a policy. It is 'All Comers' welcome.

        Even the TV networks have policies - although I don't agree with them. But at least, right or WRONG, they have STANDARDS.

        Does this mean the Dixie Chicks can advertise here also? Or would that offend Chevron?

        "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

        by talex on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:22:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think they did... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BachFan

          For their movie.

        •  dixie chicks have advertised here (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          redlami, Elise, mariva, BachFan

          WE WON! LET'S ACT LIKE IT!

          by terrypinder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:41:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  The TV networks don't have standards (0+ / 0-)

          so much as they have censorship. Which means they decide what will be injurious to viewers (read: get sponsors or owners upset). This led, in my area, of a Clear Channel owned station refusing to run certain Democratic ads because they (gasp) told the truth about the Republican incumbent.

          This is definitely a policy: it says that sponsors may advertise here, but doing so gives them no leverage over the editorial content.

          •  It is not a policy (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            stephdray, sfRenter

            when you will sell to anyone.

            I've owned my own business all my adult life. In every business I have had there has always been potential customers I would not do business with. Sometimes I did not want my brand associated with them. Sometimes I did not like the way they did business. There are other examples but you get the point.

            Accepting ads from someone like Standard Oil promotes a company that 'fuels' Global Warming and Air pollution - and as we all know promotes war in the Middle East by virtue of it's product.

            Based on that I think they are an inappropriate advertiser on a site in which most people are adamantly against those issues.

            I have never been a sellout of my values for a buck. Too bad others don't feel the same.

            "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

            by talex on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:22:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The semantics get silly (0+ / 0-)

              and it's probably not worth arguing about; clearly you don't approve, and that's a valid point of view. But a policy that says "I accept ads from everyone" is by all means a policy. You might not like that policy, but it does spell out the site owner's intentions and now everyone knows what Kos intends to do and can applaud or complain as appropriate to their opinion.

              •  Isn't It Silly (0+ / 0-)

                that not to long ago Kos was pushing Buy Blue and today he supports Chevron (anything but Blue - or Green for that matter)?

                Yes not only was Kos supporting Buy Blue but he was putting down another company that was ripping off their idea. But now he support companies that are not Blue or Green? If anything the lack of consistency is alarming.

                Oh and did you notice the ad for http://www.chevronwontyoujoinus.org/

                They are holding an action against Chevron for underpaying employees and not providing them with any kind of health insurance.

                Is that the type of money Kos wants? Will he help forward that kind of agenda for a buck?

                Yeah, go ahead and call 'I sell to anyone' a policy if you want. But I have one question...

                Should Standards and Values come along with those policies. Or do you throw Standards and Values out the window when it comes to a dollar?

                "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

                by talex on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:34:41 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  You really need to be right don't you? (0+ / 0-)

                  You argue Kos doesn't have a policy. He does. You just don't like it. So go ahead complain about it, nobody's stopping you. But nobody's listening to either of us because this discussion just isn't that important.

            •  The Chevron ad will influence KOS (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              talex, PaulGaskin

              It is naive to think that someone will not be influenced by a lobbyist giving them money.  The money from Chevron goes to KOS, his projects, and his family which brings KOS pleasure. Now Chevron is associated with pleasure in his subconscious and will influence his decisions in regard to issues that involve Chevron. Do some research into the mind and advertising if you doubt this.

              The only way to stop advertising influence on DailyKos front page decisions is to create a separation between editors and advertisers with some sort of board of directors or some cushion between profits and editors.

              With no cushion between the money and editor advertisers will buy influence at DailyKos without KOS even being conscious of it.

              --CA-11: Richard Pombo enriched by Jack Abramoff

              by ImpeachBushCheney on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:00:52 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Only half OK ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Creosote
        I think what raises my eyebrow initially was,...

        that little spot on top of first column thread, is a special place. I thought it wasn't an ad. More for things that Kos find supremely important. (yeah like pushing his book, or announcing election result, bla bla)

        adding the usual add place on center and above masthead. I can understand that.

        But the Chevron, ads didn't make sense. I thought it was "news"things that kos find important for reader to read, consider and click. Not regular advertisement.

        --------

        That's the confusion.

        Is the little space advertisement or kos important spot?  If Kos is running ad, it should look somewhat different than regular announcement/news/personal item etc.

    •  but what about the ethics (4+ / 0-)
      of stealing someone else's advertising policy?

      .

      .

      skippy the bush kangaroo - the "with" in "filled with hate!"

      by skippy on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:19:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sounds good to me (16+ / 0-)

    I think you've struck the right chord. The Nation has been through this thicket -- you're smart to grab their policy.

    "There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order." Ed Howdershelt

    by JuliaAnn on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:16:44 AM PST

    •  Big difference between The Nation & dKos (19+ / 0-)

      The Nation is an advocacy journal, dKos is activist blog.

      My view of the some of the ads is somewhere between Markos' opinion above and that of what Markos calls the purity trolls. Certainly Markos is entitled to make money, and he does put it to better use than Wal-Mart, but I think there should be a higher standard for ideological consistency in this activist environment. There should be an attempt to avoid ads whose purpose is at odds with the purpose of the site and its owner. I believe that the site should be consistent in the promotion of its stated goals.

      Furthermore, I don't believe there is a question as to whether the community is smart enough to discriminate between ads that are constructive or not.

      The advertising purity trolls seem to think that site readers are moron automatons easily manipulated by advertising. I have a higher opinion of you guys.

      That is the sort of view often promulgated by politicians to excuse their negative ads. Politicians always have a higher view of the constituents, even as they insult them.

      The truth is, advertising works, and despite our opinions of ourselves and our community, we are all subject to it in some measure. That doesn't mean we're stupid. It means we're human.

      So where is the line?
      I actually don't object to advertising that is honest and truthful. A good example is the Glenn Back ad running right now. Most people know who Beck is and the ad isn't misleading in any way. However, the ads run earlier this year by futurefaster.org was both dishonest and intentionally misleading. It sought to portray itself as a consumer advocacy group when in fact it was a coalition of telecom comapanies that was spreading false info about network neutrality.

      Here's is the distinction I'm making in a nutshell. While the Chevron ad was disturbing to have to look at everyday, it was clearly a Chevron ad. If the same ad was posted under an organization called EnergyFreedom, and the site obfuscated its connection to the the oil industry, that ad should not be carried.

      Disclaimer: All of the above is my opinion and should not be construed as a command for Markos to adhere to my principles. This is his site and he gets to make his own rules. I'm just conveying the rules to which I adhere.

      Leave It To Blather
      • Click my sig. You'll be glad you did, I swear

      by KingOneEye on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:56:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  brilliant (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingOneEye, sfRenter
        well spoke (written?).

        skippy the bush kangaroo - the "with" in "filled with hate!"

        by skippy on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:20:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Futurefaster ad (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CalifSherry, zapmama, sfRenter

        It would be great if this community could have a way to indicate info (like KingEyeOne reported on futurefaster) next to the ad? Maybe a way to comment on the ads?

      •  Here is one idea (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sfRenter

        Kos, stop selling ad, except for narrow band of group/personals/event.

        And the rest... raise money one the net directly from reader.

        That way, Kos will be compeled to directly seek readers, instead of indirectly to satisfy commercial. (There was long discussion about this on other blog scene, which has different set of problem, than political blogs)

      •  My concerns have to do with influence (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingOneEye, sfRenter

        One of the frustrations bandied about by people criticizing CNN, MSNBC and the network news shows is that the large corporations who buy up the advertising seem to have influence on the type of news being covered. I (somewhat) fear the same thing happening to the political blogs.

        •  That's an important issue. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sfRenter

          When someone is being financially rewarded, their behavior may be affected. It might not be overt in the sense that Markos would post a long pro-Chevron manifesto. But maybe he wouldn't go out of his way to be critical, and may just say nothing when Chevron deserves a smackdown.

          My impression of Markos (and I don't know him personally) is that he would not let these advertisers influence his behavior. But it's about the perception of conflict as much as the reality. And that's where it gets touchy. If, in the example above, Markos really didn't believe that Chevron deserved a smackdown, he would still be accused by many of giving them a pass. That's why the perception standard is used by the politicians with the highest integrity.

          Leave It To Blather
          • Click my sig. You'll be glad you did, I swear

          by KingOneEye on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:11:37 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Naturally this is a concern, but... (0+ / 0-)

          At least for right now, Daily Kos is the largest weblog in the world. People are scrambling over themselves to advertise here. That doesn't put them in much of a place to wield influence.

      •  Agree and disagree (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingOneEye, Cool Blue Reason, BachFan

        I disagree with your activist vs. advocacy point. To be honest, I don't see a difference, so I think Kos borrowing the Nation's policy perfectly reasonable.

        Now, where I agree is with the misleading ads. Not sure how Kos could handle it better -- you'd need a researcher. Maybe he's getting to the point where he can afford one. Or just use us as his researchers and pull the bad ones.

        Don't know what the best answer to that is. But I feel strongly that advertisements that deceive should be hit back hard rather than rewarded with our eyes.

  •  I like the idea of Chevon folks reading (8+ / 0-)

    what we have to say!

    Americans have now seen what preemptive war looks like and they don't like it. American bombs fuel extremists.

    by mattes on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:17:17 AM PST

    •  Why would they do that? (5+ / 0-)

      Their placing an ad here doesn't imply that they're opening up a dialogue with us. It implies they want us to buy their product.

      •  I am sure they are monitoring the site. (0+ / 0-)

        Americans have now seen what preemptive war looks like and they don't like it. American bombs fuel extremists.

        by mattes on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:01:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  no, they hope to influence the site posts (0+ / 0-)

        to not so demonize them...

        It's the same reason they advertise on CNN and even "underwrite" the news on PBS.

        I don't mind holding the Nation up as a model for balancing independence with corporate advertising, but there are some realities and complexities to taking "other peoples money" (ie corporate bucks) and we shouldn't close our eyes to these.

        Power Corrupts. Proof: Mark Kirk, IL-10.

        by sfRenter on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:08:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That's pretty silly. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Elise, sfRenter

          no, they hope to influence the site posts

          to not so demonize them...

          We won't say "Chevron is polluting!" because Chevron is advertising here? What, they're another poster here, a part of the community, one of our buddies?

          No.

          •  i don't claim they're not being silly (0+ / 0-)

            only that that's their goal and intention.  Their ads are not product-specific -- they are P.R. pieces for the company.

            And, while many of us here will not change their opinions of big-oil in the slightest, the company either sees the ads as carrying a positive impact for the company, or else they wouldn't be advertising here in the first place.  

            Every little bit to soften their image however they can.

            Power Corrupts. Proof: Mark Kirk, IL-10.

            by sfRenter on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:14:24 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  My father-in-law (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sfRenter

              used to exclusively buy gas from Texaco because they sponsored the radio broadcast of the Metropolitan Opera on Saturday afternoons.

              And I know, for a fact, how much his life was enriched by godawful Wagner coming through his crummy old radio while he did woodwork in the garage.

              So maybe these corporations can do some good. Not enough for the harm they do.  But it's better than nothing.

    •  we have to buy their gas (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mattes, mariva, sfRenter

      they should have to hear what we have to say.
      Good explanation Kos. I feel a little like Melanie in Gone With the Wind when she excuses Rhett Butler saying,"I should never question any device of yours."
      It does sound like good policy and as long as Chevron, or any advertisers are not working to undermine DailyKos, take their money. It makes no difference to my participation here.
      I bet they do listen in to what we are saying here.

  •  Well said (6+ / 0-)

    I think you've found the best way through an admittedly difficult problem.

  •  Must buy Chevron! (9+ / 0-)

    Must watch Glenn Beck!

    Love is a temple, love the higher law.

    by ckeesling on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:17:43 AM PST

  •  I concur (24+ / 0-)

    But, if I start rejecting ads, THEN every ad that DOES run has an implied endorsement.

    That is probably the best way to put it.  I think the ad policy makes perfect sense.  

  •  Yea, but Kos it's Chevron man (12+ / 0-)

    Nah, just kidding, I am a big fan of letting the enemy fund me. Look, the people that come here are smart enough to distinguish between Corporate advertisers on DK and the opinions expressed on DK. If they aren't then let them form their own damn blog.

  •  Eminently sensible (10+ / 0-)

    But, I expect to see 'pie' as a poll option in perpetuity.

    Let the great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change. - Tennyson

    by bumblebums on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:18:44 AM PST

  •  I'd like to see a "no lies" rule (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    selise, Paradox13

    Companies lie frequently in ads. Here's one case:

    http://www.boingboing.net/...

    And the GOP would probably like to run its lies on dailyskos, lies such as

    http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/...

    Electronic voting is no vote at all. (-3.38, -6.56)

    by agoldnyc on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:19:06 AM PST

    •  How to police (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SallyCat, SkiBumLee, possum, sfRenter

      This opens a big door

      How is it policed?
      What standards could possibly by accepted by everyone?

      I'd love a "no lies" rule, but what constitutes a "lie" in a world with dueling statistics and terms like "reality-based community?"

      It's all well and good to say "we all know X lies" but it's like pornography: we only know it when we see it.

      And that rule cannot be applied effectively to advertising, unfortunately.

      It's a free market. Bad ads will be ridiculed and lead to backlash (IMHO).

      •  Policing lies means exposing them (6+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SallyCat, Geotpf, danthrax, Mr X, possum, sfRenter

        Commenting directly on the content of an advertisement to reveal it as a lie, especially while the ad is still running, seems like the best response. That way it's not policing. Nobody gets stifled, nor endorsed.

        A diary on what a total chode Glenn Beck is could make it onto the recommend list, and look even better there with that pinchy-faced bigot right next to it!

        You can't get away with the crunch, 'cuz the crunch always gives you away

        by dnamj on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:33:26 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  From us? Awww - geez - we're always nice (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SkiBumLee, possum

        tee hee hee....not!

        Bad ads will be ridiculed and lead to backlash

        The good thing is that any corporation's marketing department paying attention to this site will know better than to put out misleading advertising. Maybe by default we'll get less deceptive advertising.  Yes I intentionally avoided more honest as a phrase!

        All the problems we face in the United States today can be traced to an unenlightened immigration policy on the part of the American Indian. Pat Paulsen

        by SallyCat on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:34:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No way... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SallyCat, agoldnyc, sfRenter

          "...any corporation's marketing department paying attention to this site will know better than to put out misleading advertising."

          That's the antithesis of the mission of many BigCorp marketing departments.

          More likely they will see it as their challenge to make it more successfully misleading.

          Leave It To Blather
          • Click my sig. You'll be glad you did, I swear

          by KingOneEye on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:08:00 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Let the digging for dirt on corporations begin! (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            KingOneEye, sfRenter

            We love digging up 'stuff' on the corporations and we can go for the gusto! It'll give us some spare time research practice going into the '08 campaign cycle. Keep us on our toes for going after the GOP in the next cycle!

            Woo hoo....let the challenge begin!

            All the problems we face in the United States today can be traced to an unenlightened immigration policy on the part of the American Indian. Pat Paulsen

            by SallyCat on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:15:56 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Editorial content (8+ / 0-)

      Did you not notice this part of the guidelines:

      But we reserve (and exercise) the right to attack them in our editorial columns.

      In the world of DKos any diarist, or Markos himself, can expose lies in ads.  Over at MyDD, when the telecoms were running ads against net neutrality, the front pagers over there were leading the charge and exposing the lies.

  •  Excellent. (15+ / 0-)

    IMHO, this is absolutely the right approach.  Anyone who rejects this discussion reveals themself to be looking for trouble, not legitimately concerned.  The Nation has been in business for a good long time, and seems to be doing fine in this regard.  I don't see where we can find a danger to this site from emulating them on this point.

    Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

    by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:19:11 AM PST

  •  unreal (15+ / 0-)

    The day that Kos advertisement content is an issue remotely important enough to merit discussion on DKos is the day I write TWO letters of appreciation to President Gore instead of my normal ONE.

    Move along people.  We have a nation to win back here.

    Thinking men can not be ruled. --Ayn Rand

    by Wisper on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:19:25 AM PST

  •  Thanks Da! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GuyFromOhio, mariva, sfRenter

    I actually think you're quite intelligent and capable of independent evaluation of the advertising you consume here and elsewhere.

    When are we going to get ads for Porn sites? Chevron - Porn sites? Hey what's the difference?

    "Rapture" is naming Joe Lieberman as Ambasador to Iraq after the November election.

    by galliano on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:19:54 AM PST

  •  Good on you, Kos. (8+ / 0-)

    I like the policy.

    As a very active user, I have to say, unfortunate though it may be for the advertisers, I don't even notice the ads.

    Chevron ad?  Never saw it. Along with all the other ads users have bitched about.  My eyes just don't go to that column.

    The only ads that have stuck out for me are the ones at the top.  Saw MSNBC, CNN, and all the others before the election.  They got their money's worth with those ads.

    "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine Pay attention Georgie - 2845+ dead Americans. Jesus Christ, make it stop already.

    by Miss Blue on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:20:02 AM PST

  •  Keep guidelines posted (7+ / 0-)

    I agree with the approach, but I also think it is important to keep your guidelines posted and accessible  -- perhaps an ad policy link to one side.  If not, the appearance of ads does imply endorsement (at least to some degree).

  •  Agree (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elfling

    IN  the end... if huge multinational corps want to give us money to put toward progressive causes... great!

    Bush will be impeached.

    by jgkojak on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:20:17 AM PST

  •  Next level of blogs... (7+ / 0-)

    I'd like to be able to private message fellow kossaks or form "groups" or "communities" with them (similar to facebook or myspace groups).  Then if we have any good ideas (like google bombing) we can implement them better.  

    Just a thought.  I know it wasn't asked for, but whatever.

  •  The abandonment of Scoop? (7+ / 0-)

    Hmmm....


    "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right." - Salvor Hardin

    by Zackpunk on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:20:31 AM PST

    •  I know! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Zackpunk, hyperstation, gpm

      I hope we get to keep our usernames / uids.

    •  Is kos daft? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LithiumCola

      It works so well!  Then again, I guess it is a little slow.

      ----------------
      The trouble with the world is that the stupid are always cocksure and the intelligent are always filled with doubt. -- Bertrand Russell

      by gpm on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:29:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Someone is growing to big for his breeches (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      EastCoastShock, PaulGaskin
      You'll note that most of the DKos enhancements were not put back in the Scoop source, and now, when GPL-licensed Free Software has done its job of katapulting Markos into prominence, here comes the ad policy that emphasises money over everything else and a move to some other, likely proprietary system. To paraphrase some old general, "for some people, there has never been any set of Principles that survived conctact with Money" ...
      •  Would it be, like, WAY too obvious (9+ / 0-)

        to make some reference to your username in my reply to this piece of crap comment?

        Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

        by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:43:55 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Damn, (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sharoney, javelina, Rick Oliver, Elise, cwaltz

          beat me to it.

          Insert witty remark here.

          by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:45:26 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I can only assume that you are a Free Software ... (0+ / 0-)
          ... developer and are actually aware of what I am talking about, right?
          •  I'm not a software developer of any kind, but (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Rick Oliver

            it's not the complicated a concept you're talking about here - I get your point, I simply reject it.

            Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

            by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:48:43 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Apparently not. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              PaulGaskin
              The whole idea of GPL licensed free software, such as Scoop is for users who modify it to contribute the changes back to the community. Markos has been avoiding that implicit obligation for a while now, and the community has been magnanimous about it because he is providing an outlet for many political views often aligned with those of the Free Software crowd. But the musings in this diary are indicating that he is simply becoming more of a commercial entity of dubious principles and far less of an example of the success of Free Software.
              •  Apparently so. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Rick Oliver, jmonch, mariva

                Once more, slowly.  I understand your point.  I simply reject it for specific reasons I won't go into here.  Disagreeing with you doesn't mean I'm just too slow to understand you.

                Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

                by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:01:28 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Bill Gates Was Right. . . . n/t (0+ / 0-)

                This is CLASS WAR, and the other side is winning.

                by Mr X on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:04:49 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Actually, a lot of the changes have made it back (10+ / 0-)

                Just so you know. There's a backlog, too, and sometimes I forget what I've added to dkos' Scoop, but I'm very busy.


                -----------
                /* You are not expected to understand this. */

                by ct on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:09:23 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Like the Ajax code? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  PaulGaskin
                  •  Who knows? (15+ / 0-)

                    But I do know a few things -- as others have pointed out, we definitely meet our GPL obligations, I'm one of the main Scoopd developers (and have been working on it much longer than I've worked for Markos), so I have a lot of say about what happens to it, and finally, I'd fully support not releasing it just to piss you off.

                    It's days like these that I think the BSD folks have the right idea.


                    -----------
                    /* You are not expected to understand this. */

                    by ct on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:27:45 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  The Ajax code is actually backend- (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Ray Radlein, PaulGaskin

                    independent. I developed it using a Java-based test harness in fact, while Scoop is on mod_perl. There were some changes made to the Scoop backend so that it runs fast on it, and improvements were made to the markup, schema and design at the same time (those are mostly Daily Kos-specific, configuration settings).

                    The Ajax code is its own independent thing and could, in theory, be hosted on any sufficiently customizable backend. Markos paid for it to be written so he owns it and it's up to him what to do with it.

                    You can still be on the team, even if you're not in the choir.

                    by peeder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:29:06 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  As I indicated in my other comments, (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      PaulGaskin
                      you do of course realise that this whole thing does violate the spirit of the GPL, which was intended to allow all the users of the software access to its source, don't you? In this case "users" are all the users of the site, not just Markos and his crew. You are simply attempting the same type of trickery Tivo people do to get around the GPL. As I answered ct, why did you not use BSD code or simply started your own from scratch to katapult the site, instead of using Free Software only to jettison it when more profitable pastures becon? No one could have accused you of abusing the principles of Free Software then, surely?
                      •  I think the argument is fairly specious (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Rick Oliver, PaulGaskin

                        I met rms back in the early 90's before linux had any traction and he was still gung-ho on the hurd. Gopher was the state of the internet art. And in some ways his philosophy might seem to echo yours.

                        But it's a very incomplete correspondence: Markos isn't distributing this software for others to use. Instead, he's letting others use software he has installed. Quite a huge difference, because much of the frustration with closed source is you can't fix things that break.

                        Can open source reach all the way out to the content (or community) you create with it? There have been proprietary licenses that have tried to do such despotic things, but few remain.

                        So I think if you actually think about your position in detail it's arguing for a dystopia, not a utopia.

                        You can still be on the team, even if you're not in the choir.

                        by peeder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:42:55 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  That is splitting hairs (0+ / 0-)
                          I appreciate your ability to see that since RMS is responsible for writing the GPL, my view on this is close to his and therefore to the spirit of the GPL.

                          Even though Markos isn't "distributing" the software, the reason that GPLv2 focuses on "distribution" is because at the time it was written, other means of using free software outside of one's own facilities were not considered practical on wide scale. The advent of the web services has changed the whole dynamics of the thing.

                          Also the "difference" in the "frustration" is not only not "huge", it is irrelevant from the point of view of the spirit of GPL, because the whole point of the GPL deals with freedom and not with installation difficulties. Freedom of all users of software to access its source.

                          The GPL does not cover the contents processed with any GPL-licensed software and so no comments or diaries on DKos are affected in any way.

                          •  What is code and what is data? (0+ / 0-)

                            I ship a word processor, and I don't have control over content that's written with it. Right? We agree.

                            I ship an online community builder, and I don't have control over the community that is built with it. Right?

                            Yawn.

                            You can still be on the team, even if you're not in the choir.

                            by peeder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:56:00 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Err.. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PaulGaskin
                            Code is a set of instructions which the computer equipment executes. Data is what is being processed by these instructions. Code can sometimes be thought of data when it is process by other code. This is all Introductory Course to Computer Science stuff.

                            If you ship a GPL-covered "community builder" which generates code then the output code would be "data" as far as GPL is concerned and would not be covered by the GPL. For an example, see: GCC.

                            But Scoop is nothing of the sort. The "contents" of Scoop are the diaries and the comments, not perl code.

                          •  You don't understand how this site works (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            PaulGaskin

                            I'm done with you, once again.

                            You can still be on the team, even if you're not in the choir.

                            by peeder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:09:14 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Right. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            souvarine, PaulGaskin
                            You mean to tell me that you have Scoop generating perl code from non GPL-covered source exclusively, such as a compiler would.

                            Pull my other one, it jingles.

                          •  I just have to say, this is the geekiest (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            phenry, highacidity, peeder, cowgirl

                            pie fight I've ever seen.

                            {dodging pie}

                            Mariva's Guide: A magablog of fun, useful, interesting stuff.

                            by mariva on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 06:37:09 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's not a pie fight (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            phenry

                            Just one guy being told he's full of shit by the three primary coders of the software he's supposedly arguing "in favor of."

                            You can still be on the team, even if you're not in the choir.

                            by peeder on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 10:41:25 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Coders (0+ / 0-)
                            whose understanding of the purpose of the license they use is rather shaky and who apparently mean BSD when they say GPL.
                          •  One missing detail, peeder. (0+ / 0-)

                            Ignoramus wants the updated Scoop source code released. He's criticising Kos for witholding (which is perfectly legal) the much-improved source code of a GPL'd project which has benefitted DKos.

                            I think Ignoramus has a valid point, considering who funded the improvements to DailyKos. I don't think he needs to invest so much emotion and judgement, however.

                            Be the alien you want to see in the world.

                            by PaulGaskin on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 01:40:45 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I might come accross as emotional (0+ / 0-)
                            but that is just the artifact of the way I debate. I tend to be forceful in my arguments in order to bring about decisive conclusions and this leads people to believe that whatever I am writing about is somehow the main focus of all my efforts. That is not so.
              •  Not Quite (4+ / 0-)

                You misunderstand the GPL.  There is no obligation to open up or merge modifications if the derivative version isn't being redistributed.  Because that is not happening, there's no obligation for Daily Kos to do so.

                And, as ct explains, some changes are being merged back.

                •  Again.. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  PaulGaskin
                  the term "distribution" was used in the GPL because no-one has foreseen the type of web service DKos is. GPLv3 addresses the issue specifically because it was developed after it was realised that GPL-licensed code was used in that way by commercial entities.

                  It was clearly an intent of GPL to make sure that all the "users" of the softwar had full access to source. But in the case of "users" of DKos, it is not just Markos himself but all of the posters/readers.

                  •  Scoop (11+ / 0-)
                    is not licensed under the GPL v3. The scoop license is known to contain this loophole for hosted web services, and I purposely have not changed the license because I think forcing people to release their tweaks for their own sites (especially in the context of scoop, where the line between what's "code" and what's "templates" is pretty blurry) would be onerous.

                    The "users" of this site's Scoop software (for GPL purposes) are Markos and anyone else he hires or allows to admin this site. That's it.


                    --
                    I am a reform Democrat.

                    by rusty on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:47:44 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I think we ought to have a round of applause (6+ / 0-)

                      for rusty and his creation of Scoop, which we have enjoyed so much over these years (and we'll probably continue enjoying for a little while at least! ;3).

                      Scoop has a lot of very subtle brilliances to it that make this community work, and it's going to be (and has been!) a real challenge to improve upon.

                      Congrats, rusty, and thanks!

                      You can still be on the team, even if you're not in the choir.

                      by peeder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:01:33 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Rusty and Scoop got a mention (with BiPM) (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        highacidity, peeder, PaulGaskin

                        in Portland Maine's Down East magazine.  It's the 4th item down the page, titled "Blogging Liberally."

                        Coincidentally, Daily Kos runs on software developed by another Mainer. Rusty Foster, a Peaks Island resident, wrote the program, called Scoop, several years ago when he was living in Washington, D.C. (It was picked up by Daily Kos in 2003.) Moving to Maine, says Foster, has shown him that his interest in online community building extends to the world outside the computer, too. "It's hard to find [community] in this country," he says. "But we have it here in Maine, and I think that's why I've stayed."

                        In Maine, it seems, all politics really is local.

                        If the American people can't trust the electoral system to give them a fair result, then your democracy is broken. Period. - Febble

                        by Eddie Haskell on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:58:40 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  That's sad to see (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      PaulGaskin
                      You must of course realise that this "loophole" goes against the intent of the GPL, do you not?

                      Also, are you sure all of the contributors to Scoop believe as you do? You are no longer the sole Lord and Master of the thing, as I am sure you know by now.

                      This difference of opinion seems to be frighteningly common in regards to the GPL, where some insist on adherance to its letter instead of its spirit when they find it convenient (usually after becoming successful thanks to it). I am firmly with RMS and the original spirit of the GPL on this one.

                      •  I think you're overreaching (7+ / 0-)

                        I believe in the GPL too -- I'm the one who chose it for Scoop, after all. And I fully encourage everyone to submit any changes back to us. But I disagree with you about the intent and the interpretation of it.

                        The GPL is intended to ensure that no one can profit from the distribution of GPL software without contributing their changes (if any) back to the original source, and without passing on the same Free license they received the software under. The key word here is distribution. It says nothing about the users of the software, only about the distribution of it.

                        Let me sketch out an example. Say I was a writer who wrote screenplays, and I chose a GPL word processor to write my screenplays with. Then further say that I'm a complete hack, who just churns out these screenplays by the metric ton, getting paid for volume rather than quality. Being a clever screenplay writer, I also know how to code a bit, and I tweak my copy of the word processor so that it let me crank out my Hollywood dreck 45% faster than anyone else in the biz. This obviously is a great advantage to me, so I keep my changes to myself. I'm not offering the modified software to anyone, I'm just using it to my own advantage.

                        No version of the GPL would compel me to release any of my changes back to the original project, or to anyone. The GPL applies to software which is distributed. Not simply software which is modified or used.

                        I believe that this is the proper interpretation of software like Scoop, when it's been modified by someone (like Kos) and is being used to host a site (like this). I do not think letting people online use the code as users is the same as distributing the code. That is, Kos may have derived economic benefit from his changes to Scoop, but he has never released or attempted to distribute it, so he owes us nothing. I don't like the GPL v3 assertion that using this code is the same as distributing it, because it's patently not. So I don't support that license.

                        All of this is of course notwithstanding that the great majority of dKos scoop changes have been released back to the community, and Kos has already gone far beyond the call of duty on that. And I think I am in the spirit of the original GPL far more than you are here, in that it never had anything to do with use, but was always about distribution. Hence I'll stick with the license that upholds the spirit of the GPL.

                        And as for contributors, since Scoop has always been under one version of the GPL, they have explicitly given their consent to that version by submitting changes. In fact, iof I wanted to change the license, I'd have to get their permission.


                        --
                        I am a reform Democrat.

                        by rusty on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:44:02 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  The core of our difference is (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Cool Blue Reason, PaulGaskin
                          in this statement:

                          I don't like the GPL v3 assertion that using this code is the same as distributing it, because it's patently not. So I don't support that license.

                          The point of the GPL protections was not revolving around distrubution, although a lot of people seem to be fixated at it. Distribution was merely the mechanism which the FSF thought at the time covered sufficiently the means by which users will get hold of the software. You are focusing on the wrong thing. As RMS repeatedly explained, and the point which I am trying to make, the whole idea behind the GPL was to grant freedom to all the users of the code. "Distribution" is merely a technical gimmick of the license itself. And that is why GPLv3 corrects this to accomodate other means of people becoming users of the software. That is the critical point. It matters not how do you become a user, be it "distribution" or "web services" or whatever, the important part is that you are a user. And GPL is meant to grant you freedom of accessing the source of the code you are using. That is the whole idea of it.

                  •  Is the GPL FAQ wrong? (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mariva, PaulGaskin
                    Where does GPLv3 address this? All I can find is paragraph 7(b)(4), which states that this is an allowable additional requirement, but not part of the main license. Is this FAQ inaccurate?
                    •  This was revised (0+ / 0-)
                      as a result of complaints from people who, like Rusty, used the GPL without fully understanding its implications. After much hair-pulling it was decided to make this clause "optional" (for backwards-compatibility) and then, since it became such, it was rolled into the general "additional restrictions" section. The expectation is that most projects whose authors followed the spirit of GPL will end up carrying that extra clause.
              •  That is not the idea behind GPL... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mariva, PaulGaskin

                Only a purist thinks that you have to contribute your modifications back to the community... I'm a moderate, and if you improve the product, you have no obligation or expectation to contribute those changes back.

                http://gplv3.fsf.org/... a link to v3 of the GPL, which makes no mention of contributing modifications back to the community.

                Just my thoughts...

                •  The "community" in this case (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  PaulGaskin
                  means all of the current "users" of the software and anyone who wishes to use the software. That is the whole point of the GPL. If you make changes to code that is then being used by others (originally GPL spoke of "distributing" the software) then you are obligated to also distribute the code including all your changes. That constitutes an enforcement on "contribution" back to the pool of common knowledge shared between the users of the software.
                  •  If that's how YOU read it... (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    clonecone, MissLaura, mariva, PaulGaskin

                    The term 'Distribution' means to provide the software... the program... the source, including modifications, to anyone, including those you sell the product to.

                    The 'Community' is not DKOS readers and users... that is totally not what the GPL means.  Have you any idea how many big companies you Open Source?  Now obviously I cannot go to the NYSE and ask them to give me their source code.

                    But to each there own..

                    •  You have no idea (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      PaulGaskin
                      about the difference between Open Source and Free Source. GPL is not Open Source. It is Free Source, which is meant to guarantee freedom to access the source to all the users of the code. That is the whole point of the GPL. You want Open Source? Take a look at the MIT or BSD licenses. Scoop is licensed under the GPL.

                      And NYSE has absolutely no relevance to any of this.

                      •  I don't think kos has to give up the source code (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        mariva

                        I think if he wanted to comply with the spirit of the GPL, he would give up the source code. I don't think he's legally compelled to do so, unfortunately.

                        I'm firmly in RMS' camp as well. I guess GPL3 addresses some of these issues. I'm no expert on the GPL.

                        Be the alien you want to see in the world.

                        by PaulGaskin on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:13:20 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  What drives me nuts (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          PaulGaskin
                          is the way the attitudes of so many people change with success. When their projects are in their infant stages, they seek help from others and since others are reluctant to contribute to something that someone can use for his/her comercial gain without any contribution back, they usually insist on GPL or similar license. The project leader is only too happy to accept help ... until the project gets succesful enough that serious money enters the picture. Then suddenly the search for "loopholes" and legalistic work-arounds becomes the favourite past-time. The "spirit" of the GPL lives only as long as there is no money to be made.
                          •  Jack of Spades - KRS1 (0+ / 0-)
                            • was also featured in the movie "I'm Gonna Get You Sucka"

                            "You seem to think that everybody can be taught
                            that everyone else can be bought
                            But, you took a short, cause one guy hasn't been paid
                            He is the Jack of Spades!"

                            Be the alien you want to see in the world.

                            by PaulGaskin on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 04:03:29 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

        •  Another day, another destroyed keyboard. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          javelina, mariva

          It's either give up coffee or give up Kos, I guess ...

          - What happens on DailyKos, stays on Google. - 11/7 changed everything.

          by Jon Meltzer on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:10:52 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Your username is the only reply necessary. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sharoney, Rick Oliver, Elise, blacklib

        Insert witty remark here.

        by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:45:04 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Why, thank you. (0+ / 0-)
          I allways enjoy these sort of quips (this is one of the main reasons I have that user name) because they are the surest admission that I hit a sensitive spot with my comments to which you do not have a defense to. Ergo, all that remains available to you is to attack is my username ...
          •  nah, I can attack your ugly ass face too. (0+ / 0-)

            damn, put that thing away.

            Anything's possible with Commander Cuckoo Bananas in charge. -Homer J. Simpson

            by Cheez Whiz on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:56:14 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Your point isn't worth the effort, (6+ / 0-)

            but what the hell.

            Organizations outgrow software all the time.  Sometimes open source is the answer, sometimes it isn't.

            You're points about money truly are IgnoramusMaximus.

            Insert witty remark here.

            by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:00:27 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  My (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            clonecone

            you are divorced from reality.

            Mockery does not = concession.

            If we abandon our ideals in the face of adversity and aggression, then those ideals were never really in our possession. - Cpt. Ian Fishback

            by Rick Oliver on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:56:28 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  It does (0+ / 0-)
              if "mockery" is all the opponent has left to use, having failed to defend his/her position logically.

              It is akin to a duel where one side has lost his weapon and now stands bleeding, impotently shouting obscenities at the winner before the inevietable end, for that is all that he has left to "fight" with.

              •  Although in this case, the correct analogy (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sharoney, highacidity, Rick Oliver, Elise

                would be that I, observing that you were being pummeled by a mob that included people like rusty and ct and peeder who definitely understood the general and specific issues better than I, chose to walk away because you weren't going to come out alive anyway and my ego wasn't fragile enough to require that I individually deliver the blows.

                Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

                by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:20:57 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  That might have been correct if (0+ / 0-)
                  1. You did not walk away before they got involved in ernest

                  2. They actually managed to present arguments that defeated mine, which given the fact that it is I who is in the right on moral grounds here (and they know it) was rather unlikely from the outset

                  3. You have enough understanding of the matter to even grasp the meaning of the arguments made, which based on your posts is exceedingly unlikely

                  None of which being true of course, you chose to run away because you stuck your nose where it did not belong on an impulse, and when caught, attempted to hide first behind some imaginary prohibition against "you being at liberty to disclose", and then when that did not work, behind the backs of other posters here.

                  •  Dude, I stayed here to the point (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    clonecone, Rick Oliver

                    that I was 5 minutes late for the class I had to teach.  Give me a fucking break.

                    And as I specified way the fuck up the thread, the issue was not that I wasn't "at liberty to disclose" - those are your words, never mine, and frankly I think it's bordering on trollworthy that you're claiming I said anything of the kind - but that I was reluctant

                    to get into a long fight with a jackass moron over something that only s/he thinks is important here and which several other users are addressing anyway.

                    That's what I said, and the fact that it's what I said is pretty direct evidence that in fact others were involved in earnest at the point that I was walking away.  In other words, you are wrong on the facts of how the discussion went down - making shit up or truly deluded, you're wrong wrong wrong.

                    Do I really give a damn about this issue?  No.  Did the discussion ultimately go beyond my understanding of the issue?  Yes.  Do I understand the basics?  Yes.  I disagree with you on the morality here.  You're denying me a right to an opinion of the basic morality of kos' actions based on a broad understanding of the issues?  When my opinion here is essentially echoed by the majority of posters in this thread?

                    You go on claiming victory - but how 'bout do it privately rather than continuing to spam this thread?  If you want to talk to someone, go find a damn mirror.  Then you won't have to deal with disagreement.

                    Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

                    by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 05:33:49 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I can't believe people like you exist (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      PaulGaskin
                      If you want to talk to someone, go find a damn mirror.  Then you won't have to deal with disagreement.

                      Project much?

                      Was it me who stuck my nose into things which, your words, you "don't really give a damn about" and which "go beyond your understanding" and then proceed to use ad-hominems and epithets, or me?

                      Also, speaking of facts, let me quote you back to yourself:  "I simply reject it [the argument] for specific reasons I won't go into here". What else is there to say about your compulsive-obsessive desire to "win" arguments about anything and everything, even if they, quote, "go beyond your understanding".

                      You should seek help as this is not a healthy state of mental affairs you exhibit. You do somehow have to come to grasp with the fact that there are things on which not only your uninformed opinion is not going to shake the world, but no one really wants to see you prancing about screaming "Look at me! I have an opinion! Am I not just the smartest? Err what are we talking about? Oh right! Myself! Look at me!", except perheaps your mother. Find some other way to attract attention, which does not expose your compulsive-obsessive desire to be "front and center" in every discussion, no matter what is being discussed, so badly.

                      •  It's called rejecting your basic point (4+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        clonecone, phenry, Elise, PaulGaskin

                        and not dignifying it by getting too far into the details.  Just as I don't dignify charges that Democrats support terrorism with point-by-point refutations.  Reject the terms laid out by the person you disagree with if you don't think they merit discussion and move on.

                        And at the point where you began personally insulting me (drama princess, shallow, prancing about screaming, blah blah blah sexist insult after sexist insult), I'm making it about me to take issue with your comments?  Fucking bite me.

                        Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

                        by Laura Clawson on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 12:23:45 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  You are simply insane (0+ / 0-)
                          By this logic, it is sufficient for you to simply say "I disagree!" to just about anything, irrespective how little do you know about the subject, and then when pressed for details, you will simply insist that you will not "dignify" the discussion with any answers. How convenient. And of course the truly wacko hyperbole about terrorism is as relevant to this as thunderstorms in China.

                          As to sexist stereotypes, it is not my fault that your behaviour fits them so well. Besides, such things are rather timid when put beside outright "morons" and the like.

                          And yes, you are making it all about you, as any person behaving like you would be guilty of. You joined a discussion which you "don't really give a damn about" and which "goes beyond your understanding" and now you insist that it was all in order to not to "dignify" it with your responses.

                          Go bite yourself.

                      •  A modest request (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Rick Oliver

                        Sir:

                        You are being a dick. Please stop.

                        Warmly,
                        America

              •  You assume she (0+ / 0-)

                cared to defend her position logically.  You certainly failed to persuade the majority of the posters of this thread of the correctness of your moral judgment and, instead of considering the possibility you are either 1) wrong or 2) not persuasive, you hide behind your supposed superiority of knowledge on the subject.  Little different than hiding behind humor.

                If we abandon our ideals in the face of adversity and aggression, then those ideals were never really in our possession. - Cpt. Ian Fishback

                by Rick Oliver on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 08:19:32 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  lol! (0+ / 0-)

          Curt Weldon-A symbol of the culture of corruption.

          by blacklib on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:16:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Too easy (0+ / 0-)

        and I'm talking about your moniker, not your mom.

        Anything's possible with Commander Cuckoo Bananas in charge. -Homer J. Simpson

        by Cheez Whiz on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:55:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  well (7+ / 0-)

        I think we'll have to wait and see what the replacement is first, no?

        Also, I'm not sure you're interpreting GPL correctly here. I generally don't get too involved in those issues but IIRC if you're not redistributing the work, you do not have to release any modifications made to the source code. From the wiki:

        for example, a public web portal running a modified derivative of a GPLed content management system is not required to distribute its changes to the underlying software

        •  That is the main reson (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          PaulGaskin
          for GPLv3 clauses that deal with this issue. It is a essentially a loophole in GPLv2 that goes contrary to its intent. When GPLv2 was written, this situation was not being considered and thus protections against it were not specifically embedded in the license. But it is clearly in the spirit of the GPL.
        •  I ANAL (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Rick Oliver, mariva, PaulGaskin

          I'm absolutely certain that he's not interpreting the GPL, especially in its current format, correctly.

          You can argue, I suppose, that Kos has some kind of moral obligation to release the enhancements to Daily Kos that he has paid for, but he is quite clearly not under any legal obligation.

          •  correct (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mariva

            And I believe that is what IM is arguing.

          •  That is partially correct (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            PaulGaskin
            GPLv2 is deficient because the FSF was unable to foresee the type of use to which the GPL-licensed code would be put to. But from all of his writings, RMS clearly intended for it to cover all the "users" of GPL-ed software and that includes all of those who use a website such as DKos. That is why GPLv3 plugs this "loophole" which web service providers, such as Markos, have discovered. In essence I am arguing that Markos stop using the "loophole", which, although "legal" (as in adhering to the letter of the GPL) runs contrary to the very purpose and the spirit of the GPL.
      •  not my fight not my fight not my fight oh (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        javelina, mariva

        I can't help myself.  

        I have read mission statements, faq and pertinent diaries on this blog many times.  Nowhere have I seen statement that indicates development of software as a principle, core or otherwise.  That makes your 'old general' quote irrelevant and therefore, simply insulting.

        It always amazes me that people don't respect the fact that Markos spent the money and developed the site.  He took the risk. It's his.  

        Most importantly, you used the wrong version of to in your header, should be 'too'

      •  Vicious Attacks (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mariva, sfRenter

        IgnoramusMaximus has raised a valid point with respect to GPL, arguing that this site has since violated the spirit of the license (as evidenced by the draft of GPL v3) while remaining technically true to GPL v2 in terms of a strict interpretation.

        For pointing this out, he is viciously attacked and derided as a troll.

        I recognize that there are different takes on this issue.  Can the open-minded, "reality-based" community allow for this?

        •  I have beeen disillusioned with DKos (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Cool Blue Reason, PaulGaskin
          a few times already, and I do have a thick skin. But it is sad never the less that the supposedly "progressive" community exhibits some behaviours so not unlike that of the very people it claims to stand in opposition to. Ad-hominem attacks, attempts to shout down people preceived to be against the "team" without even bothering to research the point of contention, personality worship, "greed is good", "ethics is for suckers" and so on, in this little bit of a thread of one diary alone. Sigh.
          •  Did you expect something else from progressives? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mariva

            I don't self-identify as a progressive because living an uncompromised lifestyle depends on immediacy, not progressivism.

            Philosophically, I'm more of an existentialist than a progressive. I can see how the "progressive" philosophy can lead to compromises.

            Be the alien you want to see in the world.

            by PaulGaskin on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 03:17:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I thought "progressive" was a political identity, (0+ / 0-)

              not really a philosophy, per se. (Just for sake of argument, what would an "Existentialist party" look like?)

              Mariva's Guide: A magablog of fun, useful, interesting stuff.

              by mariva on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 06:40:49 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  What would an "Existentialist party" look like? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mariva

                Uncompromised by lifestyle choices which are incongruent with one's principles.

                Unwillingness to off-set one's rights, entitlements, satisfaction into the future. That's just a recipe for indefinitely delaying gratification.

                I must live here and now, so my lifestyle choices might as well reflect my immediate needs.

                Uncompromised by relationships with compromised political allies.

                Living rather than merely surviving.

                Example:

                Decriminalize Marijuana for recreation, not merely for medical purposes.

                Be the alien you want to see in the world.

                by PaulGaskin on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 07:13:58 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  ....uh... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        phenry, highacidity

        the SOFTWARE catapulted DKos into prominence?...

        who knew?  it's all about the software!

        George Allen: racist bully; you know what to do

        by jmonch on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 04:10:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Free software was (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mariva
          what made it possible for Markos to launch the site without tens of thousands of dollars in additional expenditures and by using Scoop he made his site different from other sites which used different kinds of software (although also mostly free, such as WordPress). The point is that Scoop was integral to DKos' success. Not wholly responsible for it, but it did play a major part in it.
  •  Sounds good to me, Kos. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tikkun, Geotpf, mariva, kestrel9000

    Though I would be remiss not to disclose that as someone who used to schedule ads for a living (local TV station), I now find myself automatically ignoring them all.

    Chevron took advantage of your proven high traffic record, and you took advantage of its deep pockets. Absolutely nothing unsavory or ethically-challenged about that. Though you didn't need to explain yourself, by doing so you doused a potential flame war.

    •  Keep folks from ignoring ads & make MORE MONEY! (0+ / 0-)

      Obviously this website has expenses to pay, and if contributors and subscribers don't make it - advertising can.  I imagine that holds true whether this enterprise is 'for profit' (even in the public interest) or a traditional 'non-profit.'  

      Since the ads are a fiscal punishment for users who are non-subscribers and therefor NOT paying their own way - why not do what Snopes.com is doing?  

      Punish 'em a little more, and maybe MAKE a little more revenue than if they subscribed in the first place.  OR, just get rid of the damn 'freeloaders' anyway.

      First they insert a 'spacer' ad between the index front page, and ANY link the user clicks on - and thus forbid access to ALL pages on the website, UNTIL the user clicks through the ad.  This kind of ad should command a higher revenue for both the website and the advertiser.  EFFICIENCY.

      Snopes is doing it with Delta Air right now.

      Secondly, they quit worrying about country bumpkin 'dial-up' users, and utilize software with such high volume data that 'dial-ups' simply drop out, after waiting way too long to load.  Broadband priority programs can just ditch non-subscribers by default, and such users have nobody to blame but themselves.  Either for being cheap, or poor - or both. Screw THEM!  They're not helping.

      Course, I can't use Snopes at all anymore, but I gather it's MY loss alone?

      (-4.88,-5.23) "My country is the world; my religion, to do good." -Thomas Paine, 1791

  •  No problems here (8+ / 0-)

    The wall between content and sales in like the wall between church and state.

    Insert witty remark here.

    by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:20:49 AM PST

  •  Me, too. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Luetta, kestrel9000

    I think it's fair.  

    I'm glad they are subsidizing us.  The important thing is not to become dependant on the ads, which we can prevent by more folks (those who can afford it) subscribing.  

    But the ad policy is fine.  

  •  abandonment of scoop? (6+ / 0-)

    Kos, we have to talk about this, I've had thoughts in this direction.  Maybe I can help.

    Are you going to release the source of the new program?

    Some Democrats are nervous that Dean, who has actively opposed the Iraq war from the start, will galvanize Republicans. --CNN, Saturday, February 12, 2005

    by clyde on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:21:50 AM PST

    •  Release the source? (9+ / 0-)

      Probably not. At least not initially.

      It'll be highly customized to my vision, and there are already a ton of open source content management systems out there.

      As it matures, then I'll probably consider releasing it.

      •  Will (4+ / 0-)

        we get to keep our usernames / ids?

      •  the main problem with scoop (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        terminal3, mariva

        as I see it, is that it's too damn slow.  You should not need anywhere near as much server hardware.  A site with DKos's level of traffic (well, on normal days, not election day) should be runnable on a single server, giving much lower hosting bills, so it should be within reach of a small organization to have a blog with this much traffic.  However, the open source CMS's out there don't really seem geared towards that.  Like Scoop, their implementation strategies are best suited for smaller sites.  It's better to bring in the methods used by huge sites ("huge" means for example Google) and the technical approach is quite a bit different than what Scoop does.

        Some Democrats are nervous that Dean, who has actively opposed the Iraq war from the start, will galvanize Republicans. --CNN, Saturday, February 12, 2005

        by clyde on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:41:04 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'd argue against that - drupal could work (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          juls, peeder, mariva, PaulGaskin

          I'd argue that the open source CMS packages could be made to work pretty easily. Now the one I know is Drupal but that isn't to say that either Joomla or Plone (or others) wouldn't work too.

          But Drupal runs MTV UK, Sony Musicbox, The Onion and several other high traffic sites without nearly the amount of hardware that is here and comparable levels of traffic.

          The thing to be addressed with the open source cms world is their concept of blogging which for all but the smallest sites generally sucks.  But it seems like having a new take on that vs the full cms would be easier.

          Pre-order unConventional, the official photo documentary of YearlyKos 2006!

          by Raven Brooks on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:06:27 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I should look at drupal, however (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            terminal3

            I had thought while some details might differ, the general strategy was about the same.  A better example of what I've been thinking of is livejournal.  It is very highly optimized, much more than drupal, I think.

            Some Democrats are nervous that Dean, who has actively opposed the Iraq war from the start, will galvanize Republicans. --CNN, Saturday, February 12, 2005

            by clyde on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:15:18 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Drupal? Hell no (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            PaulGaskin

            No way i would trust this site to drupal.

            •  hmm i hadn't heard that (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              PaulGaskin

              Drupal had problems greater than those of Scoop.  I'd have said maybe that Drupal is more of a sideways move from Scoop than an upgrade.  

              I hope you will release the code for whatever you're doing.  It's an important application, and making all the code visible (including the very latest development code in the source control tree) has been working ok for Wikipedia (i.e. it hasn't made abuse problems any worse as far as I know).  

              Some Democrats are nervous that Dean, who has actively opposed the Iraq war from the start, will galvanize Republicans. --CNN, Saturday, February 12, 2005

              by clyde on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:51:27 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Also (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            peeder, PaulGaskin

            how do you know the hardware setup of MTV UK and the others?

          •  But just to clarify... (0+ / 0-)

            I'm not in anyway suggesting a CMS for the project because doing so without knowing the requirements would just be foolish.  What I was responding to here is the assertion that the open source CMS world cannot perform well on high traffic sites.  It can and does.

            I've worked on several high profile sites that get comparable levels of traffic and the sites do perform well with far fewer servers involved.  If you get agressive with caching and using third party solutions like memcached they perform even better than the base CMS package + your hardware config would normally allow.

            Pre-order unConventional, the official photo documentary of YearlyKos 2006!

            by Raven Brooks on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:45:15 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  This thing has an awful lot of personalization (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              terminal3, Creosote, PaulGaskin

              Have you considered just how much it has vs. the other sites? And it's all peppered through with it.

              You can still be on the team, even if you're not in the choir.

              by peeder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:46:58 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Like I said, you need to know the requirements (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mariva, PaulGaskin

                Like I said, you need to know the requirements.  And I would not want to get into a debate about it when I don't even know the full extent of customization here vs. what the vision for the future is.

                What I will say is that Drupal specifically is a framework, you can build anything you can think of on top of it, you can override other modules, you can even replace core modules entirely if you don't like them.

                These projects I was referring to are very complex and personalized, so it is very much within the realm of possible.

                Pre-order unConventional, the official photo documentary of YearlyKos 2006!

                by Raven Brooks on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:52:00 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  It is all about (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                terminal3, peeder

                how good the core is and how useful it is to have that be open source and constantly upgraded v. having a completely proprietary system.  

                Like terminal3 I know the most about Drupal and it has been growing in leaps and bounds.  Upwards of 400 developers are making their living on it right now.  Take the time to investigate Drupal and other open source platfoms before dismissing them out of hand.  What was true of Drupal a year ago may not be the case now.

                •  I have nothing against Drupal (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  terminal3, Creosote

                  I've met the maintainer and I respect what they've got. I haven't evaluated it to see whether this site could run on it better.

                  And I haven't been consulted on this particular project (replacing the backend) although I've intimated some things that I would do to improve what's there now. It's a very ambitious thing to replace the whole backend with something completely custom. It can be done given sufficient talent and managerial acumen, but then you have to maintain that yourself...

                  You can still be on the team, even if you're not in the choir.

                  by peeder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:26:40 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yep (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    terminal3, peeder

                    I hear ya.  It is going to be a huge project and then you have to keep it going.  Good luck!

                  •  There's the key issue... (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    juls, peeder

                    If you have something completely custom then right away it becomes more of a challenge to upgrade and maintain if you don't retain the original people that got you there.  If you want to bring in new folks there is a pretty decent learning curve.

                    Anyway, I'm afraid I couldn't really offer any concrete advice without knowing details.  I'd happily volunteer there but I suspect there is already a fully staffed team.

                    Pre-order unConventional, the official photo documentary of YearlyKos 2006!

                    by Raven Brooks on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:35:20 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  memcached makes a big difference (0+ / 0-)

              and I didn't realize drupal could use it.  I thought drupal just made a zillion SQL calls per page view and that Scoop does the same thing.  

              Some Democrats are nervous that Dean, who has actively opposed the Iraq war from the start, will galvanize Republicans. --CNN, Saturday, February 12, 2005

              by clyde on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 04:45:22 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  I love Drupal (0+ / 0-)

            and here's why.

            Mariva's Guide: A magablog of fun, useful, interesting stuff.

            by mariva on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 06:46:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  the Nation's guidelines (9+ / 0-)

    I remember the first time I saw an issue of The Nation with an entire back-cover ad for Fox News.  There was a moment of "What the hell?" and then I burst out laughing.

    There are probably only a few groups in the world that  are a worse target for an ad for Fox News.  So as far as I'm concerned, Fox News might as well have just given The Nation an anonymous check to help cover operating expenses.

    "If you want to make peace with your enemy, you have to work with your enemy. Then he becomes your partner." - Nelson Mandela

    by Bearpaw on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:21:53 AM PST

    •  First amendment? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      stephdray, bic momma

      I can't believe that a supposedly high-brow magazine like The Nation begins a discussion of advertising policy with a sentence like this:

      Although the relationship of the First Amendment to commercial advertising is complex, we start with strong presumption against banning advertisers because we disapprove of, or even abhor, their political or social views.

      First amendment?!  When did the government buy The Nation?  The first amendment has nothing to do with this issue.

  •  Ads? (5+ / 0-)

    With Firefox I never see those annoying things.  Ahh.  Firefox.

  •  Good guidelines (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    javelina, kestrel9000, sfRenter

    If somebody sees an ad they don't like then they can line-up a diary and blast away.  With this approach, readers like me will learn what the problems with an advertiser might be.  If the site just bans the ad, I don't learn anything.

    So I see only tatters of clearness through a pervading obscurity - Annie Dillard -6.88, -5.33

    by illinifan17 on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:22:15 AM PST

  •  I like it (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eeff, Miss Blue, Luetta, kestrel9000

    I've never shyed away from taking corp money. We pay enough to them, why not get some back? PS: I miss the top banner ad already. I got used to it pretty quickly. Loved the look of Mother Talkers.

  •  Latest Scoop! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kestrel9000

    Ralph Nader helped the Republicans lose the elections!

    Ralph my man!

    "Rapture" is naming Joe Lieberman as Ambasador to Iraq after the November election.

    by galliano on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:23:04 AM PST

  •  Good for you kos! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Miss Blue, Naniboujou

    I, myself, think it is a hoot that Glenn Beck is contributing to the cause.

  •  Chevron sucks! (but thanks for the $$) (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kestrel9000, PaulGaskin

    Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by darthstar on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:24:10 AM PST

  •  I TOTALLY agree. (5+ / 0-)

    I find it quite funny to think that Chevron or a WalMart would advertise on this site - talk about a waste of money - and if it expands the site's presence and ability to grow, that's even better.

    Jim Webb's my Senator-elect!! Woo hoo!!

    by RenaRF on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:24:11 AM PST

  •  does that mean that you will... (4+ / 0-)

    now be willing to take ads from TNR?

  •  Reasonable position (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    javelina

    I agree readers can discriminate between ads....

    PS. whatever happened to the wooden block company that advertised in October/ November 2004? I need some more of those blocks for my kid...

  •  Not afraid of money? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Hlinko, Creosote, mariva, BachFan, jkilkullen

    Willing to put it to good use?  That might be the most sensible thing I've ever read on a Democratic site.  

    I'm good with the policy.

  •  "ultimate blogging platform in the world" (5+ / 0-)

    That's striking an editorial pose about halfway between Keith Olbermann and Wile E. Coyote. Next thing you know, we'll see the blog-name change over to the Daily Acme.

    "Our attitude was- the revolution can't start until we find our hair gel." Joe Strummer

    by histopresto on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:25:49 AM PST

  •  Doubletake? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PaulGaskin
    Finally, I'm not afraid of money, and I'm putting it to good use -- the abandonment of Scoop and a massive ground-up redevelopment of Daily Kos to be the ultimate blogging platform in the world....

    Yes, but will it be open source? That, frankly, concerns me more than any number of ads from EvilCorporateWorld.

  •  Abandoment of Scoop? (5+ / 0-)

    Oh crap... now what?  

    Don't start a blog, build a community with SoapBlox - the NEW blog framework.

    by pacified on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:26:24 AM PST

  •  Hmmm.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfRenter, PaulGaskin

    ....you appear to be running a commercial for a war with Iran up there now. Could get sticky....

    Or is "Iran: The Most Dangerous Nation" just a teaser for something that isn't going to go the way it appears to be going?

    I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end. I came here to tell you how it's going to begin.

    by sagesource on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:26:43 AM PST

  •  Mostly sounds good to me (0+ / 0-)
    I would like to have an ad auction button, i.e. if one hates the ad enough, one can pay the balance of the ad contract off and the ad disappears. Yep, I hated the Chevron ad, but fully understood the reason for it being there.

    I would also pay for a 'smite this diary' button for TUs. When this election is finally over (Karen Carter takes her seat)there can be fundraising for DKos???

    "The healthy man does not torture others - generally it is the tortured who turn into torturers. " Jung

    by sailmaker on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:26:53 AM PST

  •  was a bit hard to swallow until (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ray Radlein, Geotpf, Positronicus

    "Running an ad doesn't imply endorsement. But, if I start rejecting ads, THEN every ad that DOES run has an implied endorsement."

    There's probably not a single company/organization advertising on the site that 100% of us will love 100%. It's a blurry line, so you're right: perhaps it's best not drawn at all.
    If a company/organization feels they have something to say that would appeal to this crowd, then let it be their choice and trade their message for the money they offer. We can take it from there and decide for ourselves what to do with it....

  •  Two thumbs up (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elfling, mariva

    The most insidious aspect of advertising is its collusion with written content (see the NYT's science pages, which are rife with e.g. obesity articles nestled near ads for diet pills). As long as you avoid that, why not take Chevron's money? I'm confident that you can put it to good use.

    The UCC: To believe is to care. To care is to do.

    by oldjohnbrown on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:28:12 AM PST

  •  It is strange though -- we have an Exxon station (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ray Radlein, Geotpf, Rick Oliver, mariva

    down a few blocks away but yesterday I found myself going right past it, continuing on, as though searching for something else, something extra. A couple miles later I found myself pulling into a Chevron station with a vague sense of satisfaction. Very weird.

  •  Stop hiding behind doublespeak. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stephdray, jeepdad, GiveNoQuarter

    Running an ad doesn't imply endorsement. But, if I start rejecting ads, THEN every ad that DOES run has an implied endorsement.

    Hmm.  An interesting argument.  I can't actually have principles because that would imply that I had principles.

    Why do you feel the need to hide what you mean?  Isn't that what the Republicans are always saying about the liberals?  They have to hide who they really are?

    Come on, we're not idiots as you say, we know it's all about the money, right?  I was looking at your ad rates a while back when I was considering running a political cartoon of sorts.  Far too deep for my pockets.  You're getting what, like $12K a pop for some of these prime ads?  That kind of cash adds up pretty fast, right?  (Wink, wink, nudge, nudge)

    I'm not saying they're not worth it, they really are given the volume you generate on this site.  But still, we understand the realities of the world so there's no need to try and spin it.  We know you're just in it for the money anyway.

    •  Oh please (6+ / 0-)

      allowing exxon to waste money here means that Markos doesn't have priniciples. What a load of shit.

    •  jealous much? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Rick Oliver

      are you a troll?

      Don't start a blog, build a community with SoapBlox - the NEW blog framework.

      by pacified on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:32:41 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, he's a starving cartoonist. (I think.) (0+ / 0-)

        Mariva's Guide: A magablog of fun, useful, interesting stuff.

        by mariva on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 07:06:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  UID 111316. One of the thousands of new users who (0+ / 0-)

        ... (it seems to me) have joined in order to reduce the site's effectiveness.

        • by taking what in this context are contrarian positions on everything, seeking to drag the "Overton window" back to the right—for instance, against impeachment or in favor of war with Iran
        • by scouting out internal issues (such as advertising or Israel/Palestine) that can be used as "wedges" to intensify divisions among Kossacks.

        These are Trolls 2.0—they now understand they have to remain civil and polite, adhere to the FAQ, and avoid instantly outing themselves by cutting-and-pasting GOP / Freeper talking points. But IMHO they are trolls nonetheless, and will be far more difficult to deal with.

        By acquiring TU status and uprating each other and recommending each others' diaries, over time they could seriously dilute the effectiveness of this site, which is the long-term goal.

    •  Part of this reads like snark, (4+ / 0-)

      but part of it doesn't.  Could you clarify so I know whether or not to hold this against you later?

      Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

      by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:39:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  This is a serious comment. (0+ / 0-)

        Kos is basically saying that he can't have any principles (i.e. he can't reject ads for non-progressive advertisers) because if he did it would imply that he had principles (i.e. there would be an implication that he was only running ads for progressive friendly advertisers).

        Sorry, but that's doublespeak.  It is also horse crap.  He can reject whatever ads he wants to, it is his site.  So all I am saying is be honest about that rather than find some weird logical loophole to hide behind.

        The simple fact is that he doesn't want to reject any ads because they make money for him.  That is their purpose, after all.  The higher the revenue stream becomes the less likely he is to reject any ads (i.e. to demonstrate that he believes in principles over money).  In other words, he is a sell out to the all mighty dollar.

        Now I don't mind him selling out, I just don't want him to lie about.

        •  Oh brother. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jkilkullen

          In other words, he is a sell out to the all mighty dollar.

          Now I don't mind him selling out, I just don't want him to lie about.

          Here we go again. Are you kin to KarenC13 by any chance?

          Pelosi to the Ringwrath Rumsfield: I AM NO MAN!!!

          by Sharoney on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:49:16 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Ugh. Ok. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jkilkullen

          He may not be embracing the principle you want him to, but this is in fact a highly principled, thoughtful position he's taking.  So don't run around insulting him for being unprincipled.

          Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

          by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:56:58 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Mind over monthly bills (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mariva

          Now I don't mind him selling out, I just don't want him to lie about.

          Yes, please don't sell out. Just go hungry and starve trying to keep the site running because you certainly don't want to generate ad revenue.

          And when the site is so big you can't pay the bills anymore, Kos, just let your ISP pull the plug and sell the hardware for balance due.

          At least you can't be accused of selling out, right?

          Why is it that when someone or something gets popular and has to make business decisions to keep it going, it's automatically branded as "selling out"?

          Hey, NewStart, maybe you can be in charge of the Thought Police, and keep the rest of us from selling out, too! ;)

          -GFO

    •  Only one 'first time' (0+ / 0-)

      An interesting argument.  I can't actually have principles because that would imply that I had principles.

      You flipped it over and inside out.

      Once you start giving orders on a topic, you must always give orders on that topic.

      Once you reject an ad because it doesn't meet some criteria, the implication is that every ad you post thereafter DID meet that SAME criteria.

      Kos:
      "And you guys aren't idiots. The advertising purity trolls seem to think that site readers are moron automatons easily manipulated by advertising. I have a higher opinion of you guys. I actually think you're quite intelligent and capable of independent evaluation of the advertising you consume here and elsewhere."

      I like this better. I don't visit DK to see the ads, and I think I can make my own evaluation, too.

      -GFO

    •  How much of a while back? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PhantomFly

      Becuase I clicked your name and there is no history there.

      You can't get away with the crunch, 'cuz the crunch always gives you away

      by dnamj on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:40:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Does NewStart (8+ / 0-)

      imply new UID?  Inquiring minds want to know.

      Insert witty remark here.

      by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:42:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  note to self: (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ray Radlein, Rick Oliver, mariva

      if you keep rolling your eyes, they'll eventually stick that way.

      George Allen: racist bully; you know what to do

      by jmonch on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:57:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I understand the logic (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Inland, mariva

      Because if "you are rejecting ads that you don't endorse"--take the contrapositive, "you endorse ads you do not reject."  These are logically equivalent statements: p implies q if and only iff not-q implies not-p.  Simple first-year logic to me--perhaps not so obvious to others.

      The "Great Writ" is the cornerstone of the U.S. Bill of Rights

      by Darius Noir on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:22:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  the logic ignores a third possibility: (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mariva
        1. Ads you accept and endorse
        1. Ads you accept but do not endorse
        1. Ads you reject

        A close reading of the Nation policy revels that they DO withhold the right to reject ads, but by so doing they do not imply endorsement of all accepted ads.

        Kos's rhetoric involves a false dilemma and a slippery-slope fallacy.  It's akin to the student who asks to be excused from some activity, and the teacher, rather than listening to the student's appeal on the merits, simply answers: "If I make an exception for you, I'll have to make one for everybody".  No they won't.  It's just a dismissive move to try to get out of the argument without really justifying the finer points.

        Power Corrupts. Proof: Mark Kirk, IL-10.

        by sfRenter on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:49:11 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think you are accusing me of (0+ / 0-)

          the "either-or" fallacy.  The statement "rejecting an ad implies I do not endorse the ad" is equivalent to saying "endorsement of an ad implies I do not reject the ad."  Now you can fool around with the language all you want, but to reject ads based upon non-endorsement direcly implies that you endorse all accepted adds regardless of the tricks and games these editors play with the language. Your trichotomy begs the question as to why you would reject an ad that you do not endorse as well as accept another add that you do not endorse.  What you are saying in this trichotomy (and apparently the Nation's trichotomy) is that your acceptance and rejection of ads is independent of endorsement--so what is the criteria for accepting (or rejecting) an ad if independent of endorsement?  If what you are saying is accepted as true, then kos can "accept" and post any ad.

          And your "student appeal" analogy does not match the situation at hand.  There are no exceptions to the rule imposed by either the vacuous trichotomy, nor in the understanding of contrapositive equivalencies. Whereas exception is not the "rule" then one never has to impose the exception as the "new rule" while maintaining it as an exception--this follows from the law of non-contradiction.

          The "Great Writ" is the cornerstone of the U.S. Bill of Rights

          by Darius Noir on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:04:36 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  is this a logic-off? (0+ / 0-)

            i didn't mean to imply that your highlighing contrapositive statements as logically equivalent was invalid.  But I do take issue with the claim, whether postulated one way or the other, that rejecting even one ad implies endorsement of all other non-rejected ads.  And I don't think this postulate will hold-up if/when kos finds himself needing to reject an ad.

            One purpose of the post was for kos to clarify that "daily kos" was not endorsing "Chevron" by accepting and placing their Ad.  That point, imo, is still open and not settled by kos making a simple pronouncement on the subject.

            But were i to agree with him on that point, i still don't like him tying his hands to a "no rejections" policy (which i'm not sure he's doing, since he's apparently following the posted "Nation" policy, which is less than an absolute "no rejections" policy.)  His statement that one rejection would imply endorsement of all other ads seems to thus tie his hands, because rejecting an ad in the future would render him a liar in his post today, either on the point that rejection of some implies endorsement of others, or on the point that some accepted ads are not endorsements.

            my story about the student was intended to illustrate how a no-exceptions policy can lead to individual injustice, as a situation which may warrent an exception is never examined on the merits.  There are some ads which should never appear on this space, and despite his words today i believe kos will actually make the exception when he needs to.  But if we hold his implication to be sound, then making the exception and rejecting the out-of-bounds ad will render every prior and subsequent ad an endorsement, which is also not what kos wants, because then he'd have to better justify corporate ads like the Chevron.

            I didn't mean to introduce a trichotomy-based system as the be-all-and-end-all.  My larger point is that judgement of admissability of an ad may rest upon different standards than those for determining whether to endorse the content.  That's what the Nation policy is getting at.

            So kos shouldn't reject ads based on non-endorsement, he should reject ads based on unacceptability for publication on dailyKos, a more strongly negative criteria than mere non-endorsability.  The contraposative would then be that all accepted ads are acceptable for publication, but perhaps not all-the-way endorsed.

            Yes, I did beg that question... I would like more discussion of the standards to be applied to decide if an ad is acceptable or not acceptable.

            indeed, kos CAN accpet and post any ad.  I'd like full disclosure of how he goes about choosing, and since he decided to post on the subject, now would be a good time.

            Power Corrupts. Proof: Mark Kirk, IL-10.

            by sfRenter on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:52:01 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Am I being too pedantic? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sfRenter

              So anyone who argues for the removal of an ad--based on a mismatch between the ideologies of the community and those of the ad--is incorrect.  The correct procedure is to eliminate "endorsement" as a criterion for acceptance or rejection of a particular ad.  I am not sure where this is going, but it will be interesting to see the debate.  

              I didn't mean to turn this into a logic stick-fight, but I am curious as to see how this problem will be resolved.

              The "Great Writ" is the cornerstone of the U.S. Bill of Rights

              by Darius Noir on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:02:28 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  i am also curious... (0+ / 0-)

                my guess is that kos would limit rejections of ads to those which actively and directly and obviouisly counter the stated goals of the site, or those which are patently offensive to the site or its readers (as subjectively determined by kos, of course).

                such a policy would allow him to keep off GOP Ads attacking netroots dems, for example, or 9/11 CT Ads with images of burning towers and an embarassing catchphrase.

                when a less-clear case (such as an oil company promoting its environmental p.r. gestures and inviting debate on the subject) comes up, the presumption of non-rejection kicks in, and no endorsement is implied. um, maybe.

                but OTOH maybe kos actually meant what he said -- it's a logically consistent position to be sure!  He will accept all ads and thereby endorse none.  I just don't like the implications, and would rather he spoke more fully rather than relying upon the catchy rhetoric.

  •  Will your new platform be open source? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mariva

    Do you plan to share this "ultimate blogging platform" as open source under the GPL, Mozilla license, or similar?

    Just curious... You can do what you will, of course, but Scoop certainly gave you a lot...

  •  Dissenter (8+ / 0-)

    I guess so far I'm the lone dissenter here. Kos isn't afraid of money, which is fine. And he smartly reserves the right to opine against any advertiser that pays for a banner on his site.

    So, the next time my Senator accepts a donation from Big Oil, Cigarettes or Pharmaceuticals, he can justify it by claiming he's "not afraid of money" and that such donations won't impact the policies he promotes?

    "Democrats have the heart to care."

    by jeepdad on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:30:13 AM PST

    •  Kos runs a media organization (6+ / 0-)

      He is not running for office.  Big difference.

    •  Thank you. What happened to fighting the fight (5+ / 0-)

      with clean money?...count me as a dissenter as well. This is a question of principles. Guess it's old school thought.

      "Our sweat and our blood have fallen on this land to make other men rich." Cesar Estrada Chavez

      by bic momma on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:47:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  If I were in the same position, I'd take (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        clonecone

        the ad revenue from Chevron (and similarly repugnant advertisers). Why? Because I truly believe the money would yield more good than refusing the money would. (I just don't buy that big-corp ads on a media outlet is akin to a Tolkienesque Ring of Evil.)

        Mariva's Guide: A magablog of fun, useful, interesting stuff.

        by mariva on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 07:21:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  what are you saying, (0+ / 0-)

      you think Kos would change his editorials and political actions on this site to a way that would benefit Chevron?  Because that's the comparison you're making.

      I do think every situation should be looked at on its own merits, and that seemingly similar situations might have some small but critical difference that ethically points to a different appropriate decision.

      I also believe in making decisions in context of the larger picture.  This means that, for example, though one believes with all one's heart and soul that premarital sex is wrong and that talking about birth control would encourage it (true or not), one might actually be able to see the multiple resulting societal effects are really what the decision should be based on, and actually reluctantly support the idea of birth control education because one is a realist and is choosing between the lesser of two negatives.

      I also believe that some Democrat's refusal to ever "compromise" what they see as their principles because they won't consider the larger scale of eventual outcomes as an important factor, means that they are achieving far less positive impact on society, or much of any impact, because of it.

    •  Of course he can SAY that. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mariva

      But unlike Kos, said might not have the credibility of actually supporting a blog that regularly smacks down the very peopel who advertise on the blog and provides an open forum for any opinion on the advertisers whatsoever.

      There isn't even an appearence of impropriety.

      It's the proto-fascism

      by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:35:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Awwww... I was looking forward to Pie War II...:( (5+ / 0-)

    Shrug.

    I'm sure something suitably inappropriate will pop up by the middle of next week.

    Always does. :)

    I feel like I am part of my own country again.

    by cskendrick on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:30:50 AM PST

  •  Well said. Never too late to steal a good idea. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MissLaura, mariva

    A solid and well spoken position is an important step in KosLand.  This should be part of the FAQ for all to find and consult.

    In time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act.--George Orwell

    by possum on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:30:53 AM PST

  •  Chevron = evil ... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stephdray, jeepdad, RallyPoint

    http://www.amnestyusa.org/...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/...
    http://corpwatch.org/...
    http://www.chevrontoxico.com/...
    http://news.independent.co.uk/...
    http://soc.hfac.uh.edu/...

    I disagree and think it should not be necessary for the health or welfare of this site, which you run but which we all contribute to, to accept ads from demonstrably evil entities. Perhaps ads should be put to a community vote via the poll function. That would be easy, and give these decisions over to to the community here, which is more in the spirit of the site. As it stands, don's we all feel like were providing content for some kind of Chevron PR push?

    [RED/GLARE]

    For business reasons, I must preserve the outward sign of sanity.

    --Mark Twain

    by redglare on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:31:27 AM PST

    •  Hey, wow, did you even read the post? (9+ / 0-)

      And, uh, how are you proposing to replace the revenue?  You going to buy the ad space?  Invent a process where servers come free and ct doesn't need to be paid and kos and his family have no living expenses?

      Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

      by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:47:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Buy all the ad space yourself (8+ / 0-)

      that way you can be 100% sure the content meets your purity standards.

      Insert witty remark here.

      by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:47:56 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ok, I'm beginning to think (7+ / 0-)

        that only one of us should be allowed to be in one of these threads at a time, since we get so repetitive.

        Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

        by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:59:20 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Don't twist my comment, Cloneclone (0+ / 0-)

        I wrote...

        Perhaps ads should be put to a community vote via the poll function. That would be easy, and give these decisions over to to the community here, which is more in the spirit of the site

        How does that mean to you that I want to impose my own "purity standards"?

        [RED/GLARE]

        For business reasons, I must preserve the outward sign of sanity.

        --Mark Twain

        by redglare on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:12:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The community isn't paying for the operation (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Elise

          of this site so why should we be deciding what ads get run?  Use does not constitute ownership.

          Insert witty remark here.

          by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:26:43 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yet the community is providing 99% of the content (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sfRenter

            For FREE here. Now, free labor is as good as capital, is it not?

            Whereas the Nation pays its writers money.

            There is a pretty huge difference there, no? It seems therefore that the community ought to have some say in which entities are allowed pay to post their messages in the midst of all this community contribution. For instance, would you object to GOP ads here?

            The bloggers bring eyes to the site, to the ads, etc. And if they are not to be compensated for that with ad revenue, it seems to me that the bloggers should have a voice in what ads are here.

            [RED/GLARE]

            For business reasons, I must preserve the outward sign of sanity.

            --Mark Twain

            by redglare on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:38:24 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's a silly argument (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Elise

              because no one is forced to post here.  It's completely voluntary.  If you don't like how your content is used you are free to take it somewhere else.  That is your vote.

              Insert witty remark here.

              by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:42:05 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  But then I wouldn't have the supreme pleasure... (0+ / 0-)

                ...of interacting online with people like you.

                Let me get this right: you do not WANT any say in who puts ads next to your blogging and comments? You don't care with WHOM you associate your thought and ideas? Isn't that kind of like intellectual prostitution?

                I personally want a part in the decision. I want a voice, as part of the community. I believe that community involvement in decision making is almost always good and that top-down power structures tend to be bad. It's called democracy vs. despotism.

                I guess you prefer the strong-man model of rules making...surprising you're not on the other side politcally. You like having a "Decider" in charge, no?

                [RED/GLARE]

                For business reasons, I must preserve the outward sign of sanity.

                --Mark Twain

                by redglare on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:02:43 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I don't care who runs ads here. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Elise, jmonch

                  Not one bit.  I could make a list of all the conderns I have in life and you wouldn't find it listed.

                  This site isn't a democracy.  It never has been.  There's no club constitution, no steering committee, no ratification of new rules.  It's a private website.  I'm offered free use of it as long as I abide by a few, and I mean very few, rules.  I may feel like I'm a member of the community, but that's just a feeling.  It doesn't imply ownership. You may desire a voice in decision making but that doesn't mean you get one or even deserve one.

                  Here a proposition for you.  You start a business.  I'll shop there but only on the condition that I get a say in every single business decision you make.  Sound fair?

                  Insert witty remark here.

                  by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:19:04 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  It's a fair proposition... (0+ / 0-)

                    ...if my business is selling the product of your free labor.

                    [RED/GLARE]

                    For business reasons, I must preserve the outward sign of sanity.

                    --Mark Twain

                    by redglare on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:22:39 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Maybe you don't care... (0+ / 0-)

                    ...because you hardly do any blogging here, Cloneclone. Unless that handle is a sockpuppet of yours. You only have four blog entries! So it's not really your content that is much being associated with a Satanic outfit like Chevron, is it? You're more of the occasional commenter/complainer than the hardcore daily or at least weekly contributor to Daily Kos, no? I see now why it does not matter to you who puts up ads here. Sorry, I assumed you had a stake in this. My bad.

                    [RED/GLARE]

                    For business reasons, I must preserve the outward sign of sanity.

                    --Mark Twain

                    by redglare on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:31:41 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Occasional? (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Elise, jmonch

                      I'm here contributing to this site every single day and I've been here since day 1.  I don't write many diaries and I have never made a secret about that. Many longtime users don't diary much. This site doesn't need 110,000 daily diaries and it would be unmanagable if every person decided that the random thoughts bouncing around in their skulls needed to be on display for everyone to see.

                      You're labor is free because you choose for it to be free.  No one forces you to post here. Take your brilliance to a magazine or newspaper if you wish to be compensated.

                      I see you link to your own site.  You run google ads.  Do you ask your readers and commenters which ads you should be allowed to run?  Where's your poll?  Where do I vote?  Where's my share of the profit?

                      Insert witty remark here.

                      by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:01:17 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  The point is... (0+ / 0-)

                        ...on my own site, I am really the ONLY contributor, since I get like one comment for every 10 posts I make there. If a community of contributers posted there and had objections,
                        I would take heed. Here, I'll get like 20-30 comments/per post, which is why I come here despite the undemocratic leanings of the site admin. I like feedback. And there is a vibrabt community here, no matter who owns or runs it (and you cannot own a community).

                        I think if you really have been here since day one, that likewise explains your slavish willingness to submit to the dominant paradigm when it comes to ads or anything else at dKos, since by yr veteran status you are invested in the interests of the ruling kos elite, be those interests monetary or when it comes to  hegemonic content control. Banning users, certain topics, and the like. It's all in your interest as a member of the old guard/ruling elite/old bloggers network. If the community voice were to become dominant, why, there would be mob rule, anarchy, etc., no?

                        [RED/GLARE]

                        For business reasons, I must preserve the outward sign of sanity.

                        --Mark Twain

                        by redglare on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:57:35 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Thank you for proving my point (3+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Sharoney, Elise, jkilkullen

                          You are offered a free forum for wide distribution of your content. dKos is basically a newspaper editorial page with instant feedback and digital distribution.  Your diaries are a letter to the editor.  Writing a letter to the newspaper doesn't give you the right to have a say in it's advertising policy.  If you don't like the ads in a paper, send your letter to a different paper.  Same thing here.  Don't like the ads?  Post at booman or myleftwing or any one of the hundreds of other liberal sites.  I wish you luck getting a say in their ad policies.

                          Insert witty remark here.

                          by clonecone on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:12:09 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  a business catering to it's customers? (0+ / 0-)

                    ya know... that just might work!

                    Power Corrupts. Proof: Mark Kirk, IL-10.

                    by sfRenter on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:37:52 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

              •  even better than that... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MissLaura, jkilkullen

                if you don't like how your content is being used your free to create content right here complaining about it, or to leave and do it elsewhere.

                so long as that first option remains, i can't get too angry over this.

                Power Corrupts. Proof: Mark Kirk, IL-10.

                by sfRenter on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:34:11 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  I agree with everything Glenn Beck says... (10+ / 0-)

    ...because he's running an ad here, and clearly he has Markos's 100% message-guaranteed endorsement.

    Wait...what?

    Confessions of a Former Dittohead Available Now

    by advisorjim on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:31:46 AM PST

  •  gee, I feel like an outsider! (8+ / 0-)

    I read this

    the establishment of a corps of "fellows" to do great activism

    and since this is the first I have read of it, i guess I won't be one of the fellows, or a front-pager, or a ....

    oh heck, I can still be a pest and post diaries and comments, right?  I guess that's good enough.

    Those who can, do. Those who can do more, TEACH!

    by teacherken on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:32:06 AM PST

  •  Smith&Wesson, Bechtel and Coors... (0+ / 0-)

    the foundation of any successful progressive net-roots movement.

    •  If they waste money on us Great (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elfling, danthrax, wandabee, jkilkullen

      "waste" is the key part, think of it as fighting them by taking there money.   We're savy enough to ignore the ads and thank them for there money.

      And Kos is free to say whatever he likes.

      •  Not great -- it's sad, really. And opens all of (0+ / 0-)

        us up to legitimate charges of hypocricy.

        Taking money from Big Oil is f*cked up.
        A progressive website taking their money is greedy and hypocritical.
        Brandishing their logos on this site is outrageous.

        It is an endorsement of their product -- despite any words to the contrary. And it's done for one reason: to make money.

        Oh well -- this is America. Everything and everyone can be bought.

        •  No it isn't (0+ / 0-)

          You view it as an endorsement of their product. Kos's words to the contrary indicate you are wrong. He is not endorsing the product. Is this not simple?

          •  i think what kos said was (0+ / 0-)

            that if he started rejecting ads, then the ones which he did not reject would be endorsements.

            So what happens when the national right-to-life comittee wants to splash a foetus on our banner, with "every beating heart deserves life" flashing in Bold?  Or what about "Greatest Cover-Up In History" with images of the twin towers and a link to a 9/11 conspiracy site?

            I think kos will (rightfully) reject such ads.  And he'll then be eating the words posted today about what's an endorsement and what isn't.

            Power Corrupts. Proof: Mark Kirk, IL-10.

            by sfRenter on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:02:04 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Your idealism... (0+ / 0-)

          is touching. It's also delusional. All ambitious projects, including sites like this, need money to run and lots of it. If you don't like an ad, don't look at it. Better yet, pay the little tiny fee to make the ad disappear from your monitor (and give kos some well deserved support in the process).
          In the meantime, most of us are quite capable of telling the difference between editorial content and puffy advertising. If you think you need a babysitter so as not to become confused -- well, there are actually people out there who make a living doing that sort of thing. By all means, go buy yourself one. We don't need someone of kos's energy and talent wasting his time sanitizing this site just so you can be assured of never having to see something you don't approve of. And it would be a HUGE waste of time, given the way ads get aggregated and published on the internet.
          More importantly, any medium that censors advertising in the way you suggest instantly loses credibility. So I say to kos: THANK YOU for providing this awesome medium. And I say to Chevron: THANK YOU for supporting this site, you bunch of environment crushing assholes -- keep sending all that money.

          You live and learn. At any rate, you live. -Douglas Adams

          by wandabee on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 07:36:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Do you draw the line anywhere? Hustler Magazine (0+ / 0-)

            wants to advertise on DailyKos -- some silicone babe in pigtails advertising some Hustler DVD's (purely hypothetical -- i don't even read Hutler) -- that'd be okay with you? Just block it out?

            Is there a line?

            Would this medium lose credibility, as you say, if it declined advertising for Hustler and ExxonMobil and Halliburton? With whom would it lose this credibility?

            •  My point... (0+ / 0-)

              is that it's not up to me to draw the line. It's kos's site and I'm grateful to him for providing it. He's entitled to make whatever decisions he wants to about advertising here, just like you and I are entitled at any time to simply stop looking at the site if we're offended.

              I think Hustler ads here are so unlikely as to not merit hypothetical discussion. My understanding (which may be incorrect) of how internet ads like this are bought is that site owners can elect to filter out "adult" advertising. If we ever start seeing such ads, however, I'd be happy to pursue that conversation further - it would be interesting.

              As for ExxonMobil and Halliburton, I feel the same way about them as I do about Chevron. If they want to help kos pay the bills, great (doubly so in the case of Halliburton - I love to see those guys wasting money on the wrong audience). I have no trouble distinguishing between editorial content and advertising, nor do I have any trouble ignoring advertising I don't like, and I don't need a censor to protect me from exposure to it.

              Above all, however, for me it all boils down to the fact that I do not own the site, and I therefore do not feel that I have any right to tell the owner how he should run it.

              You live and learn. At any rate, you live. -Douglas Adams

              by wandabee on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 02:16:52 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  You forgot Halliburton and Fox n/t (0+ / 0-)
    •  You forgot ex-lax (0+ / 0-)

      You definately can't have a good movement without some ex-lax.

      Oh wait.  You said net-roots movement?  sorry about that.

  •  Charge for click-throughs (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elfling, dirtroad, sfRenter

    Like Google. Then when Chevron or another irritating advertiser shows up, we can nickle & dime them to death & raise money for the professional netroots activist class at the same time!

  •  I for one have only purchased Chevron gas since (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wandabee

    the ad began to run.

    Not.

    In fact, I'm trying to remember when I last paid more for gas than I had to (which means buying brand...).

    Hmmm.  Nope, can't remember.

    Hey, the ad policy works for me.

    "I desire what is good. Therefore, everyone who does not agree with me is a traitor." King George III

    by ogre on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:34:33 AM PST

    •  you get what you pay for (0+ / 0-)

      some of the no-name places are cheaper because they skimp on detergents, which keep your engine running cleaner. I'm not sure it's a wise long-term decision to save a nickle on gas if it means engine problems down the line.

      Blue Jersey: Covering NJ like a rug

      by jmelli on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:48:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Citgo, baby! (5+ / 0-)

      How do you think Chavez funds his largesse? :-) Besides, they're a lot more easy-going with the credit cards; we've had Chevron call us when a $20 balance was three days late; Citgo gives us a couple of weeks on much larger balances and doesn't get huffy when we tell them we'll send it in when we get paid next week.

      As for the ad policy, that's the second most sensible one I've ever seen (the winner is Motorcycle Consumer News, which doesn't take ads at all). If Clear Channel or some other goober-corp starts advertising, maybe put a thick green border around it (as in, they're subsidizing the Good Guys with a little green).

      Hatred is murder (1 John 3:15)
      You can take a break from politics, but life just keeps a-comin’.

      by dirtroad on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:39:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Blogrolls (7+ / 0-)

    For what it's worth, this is exactly the point I raised when the Kerry campaign delisted dKos from its blogroll in light of the infamous "Mercenaries" comment: As long as they treated their blogroll as a kind of "common carrier," they were fine; but the instant that they removed dKos because of a comment that was deemed controversial, they all of a sudden owned every last comment posted to every last blog remaining on their blogroll.

    The GOP was, at that point, in a position to place the Kerry campaign in an unending cycle of spin control over practically every last thing that anyone anywhere in the liberal blogosphere wrote.

  •  Two things here. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Elise, cowgirl, kestrel9000, GiveNoQuarter

    (1) I'm curious about the abandonment of Scoop and the new things coming. I'm sure it's technical, and I wouldn't understand that, but what's it going to look/feel like for us?

    (2) The problem with advertising is one that will manifest itself when/if we - and I mean Markos, the FPers and the rest of us - call out a specific corporation by name for being a polluter, anti-labor, right-wing funder, etc., and ooops, lookee there, they advertise here on DK.

    Markos' decision: take their money and tell them to just smile and take it when we slap them around verbally, or decline their ad and don't take their money.

    The more insidious scenarios: Markos declines to call them out because he takes their money. Or worse, Markos shuts someone down as a troll for calling them out. Or shuts them down as a troll for pointing out Markos' conflict of interest.

    We'll see, won't we?

    Disclaimer: I have serious personal issues that are unresolved with Markos. I think his behaviour toward me, personally, has been deplorable. I stay here at DK because mostly, it's not about him.

    And I like to think I'm bright, outspoken, and ethical enough to recognize and discuss this conflict of interest no matter what crap Markos has done to me.

    But that's for you to decide.

    •  ha ha (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      leberquesgue, raines

      This crops up every so often. Someone cries about the injustices they've suffered at my hands.

      And I have no idea what they're talking about since, well, I've never given that person much thought.

      •  I'm sure (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ray Radlein, raines, mariva

        you're about to be reminded by a blockquoted old comment . . .

        •  Communication Breakdown (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mariva

          Well, one would actually hope so, really: I remember how incredibly frustrated I got a while back when one particular dKos Superstar — who I respect immensely — got really mad at me about something, and resolutely and specifically refused, despite numerous requests, to tell me what it was that I had done or said.

          I'm sure that he must have thought I was being disingenuous in my apparent confusion over something which must have seemed as big as day and twice as obvious to him, but I really was baffled by the whole incident. Oh well. Stuff happens. Even Jove nods.

      •  Oh God. That's just pathetic, Markos. (0+ / 0-)

        "I don't know what I did!"

        What, the number of people you've treated like dirt is so huge you can't remember specifics now?

        I think not.

        This sort of disingenuous denial goes by another name: bullshit.

        You took away my ability to give ratings because Slouise217 poured poison in your ear about my 'abuse' of the ratings system.

        You know, the Slouise217 you eventually banned, and the 3 sockpuppets of hers you also banned?

        You did this to several people, and you were incredibly wrong in doing so. You went on the word of a complete psycho and punished people according to her grudge, not what was remotely justifiable.

        The Slouise217 problem is gone, at least until she gets another ID and starts harassing me again, and the troll-hunting problem is also resolved.

        And yet, I can't give ratings. I'm a TU here and get lots of recs, and generally the community and I are just fine, but not so much with you. I've asked you several times to restore my ability to give recs and TRs and you haven't even replied.

        Is your recollection refreshed now?

      •  I'm thinking you didn't invite her to the prom (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        highacidity
      •  I don't know... (0+ / 0-)

        You've got a pretty good memory.

        We disagreed online about the FEC rules. I was concerned about what you called Halliblogs. Then we met at YearlyKos and you said,"Oh yeah, you're the guy that was defending the reformers."

        I was a little hurt that, after everything I've posted here, that was all you remembered me for. But I was glad to be remembered at all.

        Note: If any of the above sounded like I was taking it seriously, it's just because you can't see the smirk on my face. My disagreemtnt with Kos stemmed from an honest difference of opinion and it was always respectful and civil. There was certainly no retaliation from him because of it - as far as I know.

        Hey, maybe that's why most of my diaries don't make the Rec list. Stop discriminating against me, Markos!

        Leave It To Blather
        • Click my sig. You'll be glad you did, I swear

        by KingOneEye on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:41:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I think kos' record on this speaks for itself. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      leberquesgue, Elise

      I've never seen any evidence that he was allowing his expressed opinions to be influenced in either direction by advertising.

      Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

      by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:54:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I've seen (0+ / 0-)

        exactly how he's allowed his opinions and actions to be influenced by others.

        Maybe that same ethos applies to his advertising revenue. Maybe not. I'm not a mindreader. And I'm not inclined to give the benefit of the doubt, for reasons previously explained.

        •  Oh, c'mon, Kimberly. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Rick Oliver

          I know exactly what you're talking about and even if it is personal for you I don't see how you can say this with a straight face.

          Paul Hodes is my new representative in Congress!!!

          by Laura Clawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:10:54 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I can say it with a very straight face. (0+ / 0-)

            You can't ask me to stretch my 'giving the benefit of the doubt' that far.

            I like to think the advertising and its relationship to the content and management of this site will be an example of the best sort of balance of ethics and income and free expression.

            But I've got the bad side of Markos Moulitsas-Zuniga staring me in the face - or rather, not being there to stare me in the face - every time I log on.

            Maybe I'm wrong to generalize one thing to another. You think so, obviously. I don't. Obviously.

            So, yes, I'm speaking with a straight face, and if you don't understand that, I can't make you understand it and feel it would be futile to try further.

    •  How long will I stay around if (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      taylormattd

      Markos starts defending multinationals because they adertise on this site,or just generally shutting down discussions for any reason...answer about 5 seconds. I suspect that is the case for most of the users here. He's earned a certainly amount of trust from me, but I am not Republican robot(sheep) blindly following a leader and won't hesitate to boast if he disappoints me on a regular basis.

    •  Markos may not... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jkilkullen

      ...but we may.  Now, if Markos starts censoring posts grounded in citations that criticize Enron, then censorship is taking place.

  •  Absolutely right (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MissLaura, musing85, eeff, Geotpf, Elise, mariva

    Ads should be accepted without regard to content, that way accepting ads does not imply an endorsement.  And anyone and everyone is free to criticize the contents of those ads of the companies that sponsor them (as I'm sure people will).

    Let these companies spend their money on the progressive blogosphere.   I can't think of a better use for it.

    Is Karl Rove still entitled to "THE MATH"?

    by pontificator on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:35:44 AM PST

  •  Take Their Money & Hold Their Feet To The Fire (7+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elfling, Geotpf, KB, ohcanada, mariva, blacklib, rrheard

    I love the idea of corporate America paying the cyberbills just so long as we are free to say that Chevron Sucks!  Or that Chevron kills people every day with their lethal products but lies about their true nature in their Greenmail advertising.

    I am a freelance writer for Corporate America and I have literally made millions of dollars over the past 20 years helping Fortune 500 Companies lie to themselves in their in-house presentations, meetings and inititives

    (Clearly I am a purer artist than my brothers and sisters in advertising who make their money helping Fortune 500 Companies lie to the public.)

    I always enjoy taking dollars I've made from my ethically challenged clients and sending them to MoveOn.org, or Act Blue or any of the progressive candidates and causes I believe in.

    Chevron has a special place in my heart because they are also a big sponsor of my beloved Los Angeles Lakers.  Their signage is all over the Staples Center.  And they have a very special ad they run during every Lakers game.  But I hijack their ad time at every game by standing up and launching a loud, impossible to miss attack against Chevron, their gouging prices, obscene record profits and choking, dirty pollution their product always causes.

    I get all the little kids around me chanting, "Chevron Sucks!  Chevron Sucks!" at every game I attend.  In fact, every time the Chevron logo comes up on the Jumbo Screen people poke me and prompt me to respond.

    What this means is that Chevron spends huge bucks to help their image and build their brand and I use their own advertising to get people to associate them with crap.

    So run that banner ad and take their dough-ray-me.

    Because every time we see that logo you can hear my loud, booming voice in your head reminding you that Chevron Sucks and they're just OUR suckers who can pay the freight along the road to their demise.

    "The Buddhist was pissed... and it wasn't the first time."

    by The Angry Buddhist on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:35:54 AM PST

  •  The thing that gets me is.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfRenter

    I have a jar that I put my change in so that I can eventually buy advertising here and at another blog that I have chosen when my new site premiers.

    At the rate I'm going, it'll take about 2 years to save up for a premium ad.

    Is there going to be a chance for 'small potatoes' like me here? Maybe a text banner or something?

    4 grand is a lot for tiny biz's like mine. I dig the return potential, also the 'takes money to ....' but I still would like to put my ad on a site that I support and respect.

    Love you anyway!

    :)

    ::::

    "Let's put a shoe in there!" ~ Haywood Nelson

    by nowheredesign on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:35:57 AM PST

  •  Transcript of Drilling and Killing Documentary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfRenter

    Here.

    [RED/GLARE]

    For business reasons, I must preserve the outward sign of sanity.

    --Mark Twain

    by redglare on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:37:27 AM PST

  •  makes sense to me (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    javelina, mariva

    it's kinda like ads for glenn beck popping up on AAR this week.  if glenn beck knew his network was dropping money on the godless libruhls, he'd probably pop a vein.  so much the better!

    it's a round world, last time i checked. - bill hicks (-8.00, -7.18)

    by liberalsouth on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:37:34 AM PST

  •  Sierra Magazine--ads from Mobil (9+ / 0-)

    Back in the sixties, my dad was hired by the Sierra Club to turn the Sierra Club Bulletin into a real magazine, which he did.

    He took ads from companies like Mobil Oil, which naturally caused a storm of controversy. He didn't care. He was happy to take their money and publish articles damning them. His first priority was to get the magazine published and carry the much needed ecological stories of the day.

    Taking ads from the "bad guys" was in no way an endorsement of their policies. And based on the editorial content of the magazine, it was clear there was no influence from the advertising department.

    Proudly wearing a tin-foil hat since 1972.

    by pissed off hippie on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:37:50 AM PST

  •  But it is NOT selling out -- day-care costs $ (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mariva, sfRenter

    if you can make a buck or two along the way -- and pay for the house and car and health insurance and college down the road -- and the money happens to come from huge oil companies that we all know are rich, greedy, polluting bastards who are poisoning the air our children breahthe -- so be it.

    Who am I to criticize. I don't have a hybrid yet. I let the water run to long and leave lights on when I'm not home.

    Everybody wins. You get paid -- the site keeps humming -- the oil companies tap into a huge market (these guys know where to drill for profits).

    What could be wrong with that? Anything? Anything at all?

  •  Good. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elfling, Geotpf

    Advertising is one of the expressions of free shpeech. You don't have to like the ad to accept it. Look at Time, Newsweek, your local paper, etc. They don't censor ads (unliess in really poor taste) they use them for what they provide - money. It has always been this way.
    And I agree (and have said so before) that if you think folks are going to buy into Exxon's propaganda, then you have a pretty low opinion of your fellow Kossacks. It's just like what's going on at Air America this week. There has been a steady stream of Glenn Beck ads for his stint on CNN's Headline "news". Glenn Beck? Do they really think AAR listeners are going to tune in to that blowhole? But AAR needs the money to stay on the air. Heck, let's just keep taking their money - it's only a waste for them and a boost for us.a

    All Truth is non-partisan

    by MA Liberal on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:39:19 AM PST

    •  Well, the TV networks did refuse to run UCC's (0+ / 0-)

      ... (United Church of Christ) innocuous commercial about everyone being welcome, because they thought it would offend viewers who think gays and lesbians should be discriminated against.

      And the TV networks also refused to run MoveOn.org's Super Bowl spot.

  •  Hypocrisy (7+ / 0-)

    Enough with the flattery about how smart we are to tell the difference. How about acknowledging how smart we are to recognize that not every advertisement on this site would be an implied endorsement.

    Certain exceptions for energy (and other odious) companies can, should, must be made. If the KKK wanted to advertise here, they wouldn't impact what you write either. What's the difference?

    People who object to Chevron advertising on this site are hardly "advertising purity trolls" considering what the energy companies are doing to our country. How can we talk about An Inconvenient Truth and the need to overcome Big Oil's grasp on policy and then cave on this. It is hardly Crashing the Gate.

  •  Kos tricked me into buying Chevron! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    taylormattd, raines, sfRenter
    Good policy.

    I think there should be an additional 1 day policy:

    No diaries about the advertising.

    An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy. (Woodrow Wilson)

    by Alter Ego Manifesto on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:40:09 AM PST

  •  works for me too; go for it. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elfling

    Do it, Markos.  You & the crew deserve to earn good fulltime livelihoods doing this, with a decent profit margin for expansion and outreach and whatever.  

    If Chevron et. al, want to subsidize this community, good for us.  We're smart enough to make our own choices of how we vote with our dollars.  

  •  Wait (4+ / 0-)

    There are ads on this site?

    Oh, yeah. I paid my subscription so I didn't have to keep looking at them. Best $100 I ever spent.

  •  advertising in blogs (0+ / 0-)

    America is not far left and it seems not far right. Those extremes do not work in this country.
    Advertising by american companies, exxon, chevron, etc, is legal and part of our capitalist system. Capitalism works and should be nurtured and protected, but it should have intelligent and reasonble oversight, which far right republicans have been unable to provide. For oversight we need progressive right of center democrats looking after American workers.
    So; advertise away. If it is Chevron, Exxon, Verizon, ATT, etc., at least this poster will not hold it against Daily Kos.

  •  more pie! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ray Radlein, musing85, highacidity, Elise

    WE WON! LET'S ACT LIKE IT!

    by terrypinder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:43:11 AM PST

  •  I hate it when people who perform a valuable (12+ / 0-)

    service are compensated for it.  Like all these great bands I like -- why can't they just continue toiling in obscurity, playing small clubs for $50 a night?  God damn sellouts, going and getting popular.

    Therefore, Kos, please get rid of the ads.  You should impoverish yourself in support of my aesthetic.

    ----------------
    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are always cocksure and the intelligent are always filled with doubt. -- Bertrand Russell

    by gpm on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:43:58 AM PST

  •  Life is full of paradoxes (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MissLaura, mariva, jkilkullen

    which can be construed as hypocrisies for those who are desparately in search of hypocrisies.

    But the truth is, we all have to deal with these paradoxes and ironies in our lives if we: drive a car, use electricity, fly on airplanes, throw away trash, eat red meat, use lumber, eat fish, pay taxes, etc. - all of which contribute in some way to the problems in our world that many of us find troubling. We just have to do what we can, given the society we live in, to make the improvements we can make where we are able.

  •  Very Sound Policy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Geotpf

    Kos is right on the money here.  Accepting advertising is a far cry from endorsing some of the more nefarious practices of U.S. corporations.

    Many corporations do good things.  Some good corporations do bad things at times.  The netroots won't grow if we attempt to evaluate the inherent worth of each and every corporation before deciding whether to accept their advertising.

    Well done, Kos!

  •  Will you (Markos) attack??? (0+ / 0-)

    Did you attack the Chevron ad?  

    Going back to pie wars, did you attack the mud wrestling?

    I tend to have no problem with 'Daily Kos is a commercial site and your livelihood ... and you use much of the resources generated from ads for social good ... and we're users not owners ... thus you (Markos) make the call" ...

    But, have you / will you take a look at the ads regularly and 'attack' / call out those that are, for example, Astroturf in nature?

    •  Why should he? (0+ / 0-)

      Was the Chevron ad offensive, or is it just the fact that it was Chevron? It would seem perverse to attack a company because they advertise here. And Kos doesn't write too frequently about energy policy, so I don't see why attacking Chevron would come up naturally.

      •  Offensive ... (0+ / 0-)

        It was part of an Astroturf activity, meant -- IMHO -- to be misleading about Chevron policy and misleading re critical issues for the future of humanity/the world.

        Markos quoted the standards that he would be using, which including 'reserving the right to attack' offensive ads.  Ads that are intended to deceive/lead astray on critical/fundamental issues like Global Warming/Catastrophic Climate Change are offensive to me ...

  •  I reject this advertising policy... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eddie Haskell, Elise, Inland, lowellfield

    ... and I demand a full refund.

    Good day, sir.

    What color is your finger? http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/3/165957/047

    by Dissento on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:49:30 AM PST

  •  Hah (0+ / 0-)

    Now there's some rationalizing. Wait to you get fat and comfortable and those advertisers threaten to pull. You sound just like all the electeds,"Oh that campaign money nor the lobbyists influence my vote!"

  •  Excellent policy (0+ / 0-)

    Those advertisers are interested in DK because they realise the strength of the Community thus enabling us to strengthen further.

  •  i'm more intrigued (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    raines, highacidity, Elise

    by this fellows thing.

    is this the think tank network starting up? Will fellows get paid?

    (runs off to brush off and update resume)

    WE WON! LET'S ACT LIKE IT!

    by terrypinder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:51:54 AM PST

  •  good job KOS (0+ / 0-)

    we want this site to be free and the also be the best it can be, I think 99.9% of people on here think advertising is the best way to make this possable, subscription only sites usually fail, and this is the way we get the best of both worlds, wer'e smart enough to deal with ads even if the 700 club wants to buy a banner for thier conjob operation lol!

    this is your mission: TERMINATE the Bush presidency

    by nevadadem on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:52:05 AM PST

  •  The "black/white" view of the world (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Geotpf, mariva, jkilkullen

    Is what got us into the trouble we're in with the current Bushco evangalistas. (You're with us or a terrorist.)

    The idea that corporations -- like Chevron -- are all evil is stupid.  Look at the whole picture... at least give them credit for an ad that asks people of all stripes to engage in a conversation about energy policy and solutions.

    And now there's a current ad running about the janitor strike in Houston against Chevron.

    I think I'm intelligent enough to understand the difference between blogospheric discussion and an advertisement -- and where the dividing line is...

    The purity trolls should think about how much they sound like the Freepers.

    "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." -- Carl Sagan

    by Mike in Houston on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:53:08 AM PST

    •  the anti-chevron ad is refreshing... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      neroden

      and a good indicator of the kind of advertisers which are attracted here and can carry a broad appeal.

      My main concern is that, as the site gains in popularity the major corps will drive a bidding war for advertising space here, and a smaller activist operation such as those behind the chevron boycott will be increasingly priced out.

      I'd like kos to have an inclusionary policy, allowing for rebuttal ads from progressive or democratic or reform organizations to post at an affordable or reduced rate when the corp would otherwise monopolize the message of the dKos adspaces.

      Power Corrupts. Proof: Mark Kirk, IL-10.

      by sfRenter on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:02:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I disagree (5+ / 0-)

    Kos, I certainly respect your right to make decisions regarding the financing of this website but I can't say I agree with you on this one. Ads, unfortunately, are a necessity. However, running an ad is an endorsement of the company (even if it is an unintentional endorsement). When we allow big oil to make its way onto the front page of the place where we talk about ethics, politics, and progress, we give a voice to an industry that has spent millions of dollars destroying ideas and free speech pertaining to alternative energy.

    I don't mean this post to sound condescending. I would just like to offer my differing opinion.

    Serenity now, insanity later.

    by chicagovigilante on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:57:30 AM PST

  •  No bitching from me (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    leberquesgue, St Louis Woman

    Hell, I've developed tunnel vision so that I don't even see the ad columns.  Let 'em waste their money!

  •  I suggest an ad rating feature... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ray Radlein, dangangry

    just like the "recommend" feature that allows the readers to quickly and effectively comment on the content of an ad. Just put a tiny little box at the corner of your banner ad that allows people to weigh in positively or negatively on the content of the ad. That would defuse a lot of complaints about "endorsement" by association.

  •  fwiw, I say, run 'em. Let them (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jkilkullen

    try to convince us that we want their product. When their product suits my values, I'll consider buying it, if I need it.
    I will write some of these questionable outfits, and tell them that I saw their ad here, but will not click on it, nor consider their product until it coincides with a program of fast track sustainability. Across the board, be it an energy company, or a maker of do-dads.

  •  Democracy & Capitalism (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mariva, Hypnosis 101, sfRenter

    Give The Nation credit for adopting the only philosophy I can see that allows Democracy and Capitalism to co-exist peacefully.

    We fail when Capitalism begins to co-opt Democratic ideals by exerting direct or indirect force on philosophical stances.

    Run all the ads you can sell, but call them on their propaganda.

  •  Follow the Spanish Language Example (0+ / 0-)

    Advertisement (English) = Propaganda (Spanish)

    The Spanish word "Propaganda" doesn't carry all of the serious connotations of the English version.  It's used matter-of-factly, without prejudice, and is meant to communicate that all forms of advertisement are basically trying to sell some viewpoint/product.

  •  Chevron: Drilling & Killing (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    akasha, Picot verde, jkilkullen

    I just wrote a lengthy comment about Chevron's crimes in Nigeria - it took a long time to write & it vanished.  Wierd.  I don't have time to recreate it now.

    "Drilling and Killing: Chevron and Nigeria’s Oil Dictatorship."

    Please remember Nigerian activist and playwright Ken Saro-wiwa

    ```
    peace

  •  Options? (0+ / 0-)

    While it may seem reasonable to stop at an Exxon station when my gas gauge gets below 1/4, I make every effort not to put money into their pockets. However, pretty much everyone will use gas so we can't boycott all oil companies because of our politics.

    Still, I am wondering if the number of groups that would be willing to advertise here is that small?

  •  It all makes sense (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Geotpf, Hypnosis 101, jkilkullen

    If Kos takes money from Chevron, that's fine. If Kos starts letting Chevron dictate content because they are sponsoring him, then that's a huge problem. This is the left's major beef with the major television networks and corporately owned newspapers. It seems that too often that content is muted or eliminated so as not to offend the sponsors.

    So far, I haven't seen anything on this awesome web log to indicate that this will ever happen. The nice thing about the Internet is that if it did start happening, it's pretty damn easy to start your own blog and pick and choose your own advertisers. It's pretty damn expensive to start a television station or newspaper, so our options there are a wee bit more limited.

  •  Good policy, 1 suggestion (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    deafmetal

    The policy copied from the Nation is a good one and I applaud you.  If Chevron really thinks running ads on this site is good business, I may go sell some Chevron stock short.

    As long as you stick by the policy and therefore allow tobacco companies,Halliburton,etc to advertise if they so choose, it is consistent and defendable.

    However, I would recommend removing one section from the Nation's policy:

    If the purpose of the advertisement is to sell a product or service rather than to express a view, we will allow ourselves greater rein in making judgments about suitability. This reflects our view that commerce is less sacrosanct than political speech [...]

    This is pretty muddled and self-serving logic.  The notion that you can separate the corporate/money interests from political speech is nonsense.  And in fact, a policy that protects whatever ads are willing to run actually suggests that commerce is EQUALLY sacrosanct, not less sacrosanct than speech.

    Just leave the rest of it in and take this out

  •  I wasn't disturbed by the Chevron ad itself ... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    diplomatic, dangangry, Hedwig

    but I was a bit disturbed by its placement: in the left column, above the front-pagers, in a spot where I'd previously only seen ads for "Crashing the Gate".

    Please, let's keep outside advertising in its own area and don't mix it with content items.

    - What happens on DailyKos, stays on Google. - 11/7 changed everything.

    by Jon Meltzer on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:08:15 AM PST

  •  Good call (0+ / 0-)

    I think this is the right policy, and I'm relieved that it wasn't met with more "purity trolling."

    Petrodollars are just as good as any other kind.

  •  It's called "rationalizing" (6+ / 0-)

    If we lived in a crazy alternative world, where ads didn't mean money, you simply wouldn't run these ads, would you KOS.

    However, since the ads put money in your pocket, you find a way to rationalize why you're running them.

    Sorry, but you're a sell-out.  There's nothing wrong with tempering your ads via your moral values.  If you don't do this, you're a sell-out.

    I value your right to do whatever the hell you please, but I LOL! at the notion that your selling out is okay. Politicians think it's okay to sell out too, and I'm sure they can come up with equally rational reasons why.

    So LOL! at you.  Run your ads, but don't try and play them like their some proof of your moralistic high ground!  LOL.

    •  Yeah, money's a "rationale". (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      clonecone, mariva, jkilkullen

      It's why I work, and probably why you work.  I wouldn't work without the money, I promise you.  

      Money doesn't need a rationale besides money.  What you call "rationalizing" is quite simply the fact that people need to eat, after the expenses of the site are paid for.  There's no more "rationale" needed for accepting ads.  The statement that the ads "are placing money in your pocket" is quite an obviosu statement of fact, but the implicity condemnation of having money in one's pocket is silly.  If it's wrong to have money in the pocket, they you can volunteer some of yours to make it a subscriber site rather than free to you...free to you thanks to ad revenue, I might add.  

      It's the proto-fascism

      by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:29:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Wrong policy (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Picot verde, Hedwig, rrheard

    It's dirty money. Period. Accepting money from Chevron is rather deplorable, I think. What's next? Banner ads from Halliburton? Bechtel?

    If Daily Kos is really going to be an alternative to the corporate-controlled media, it has to take a righteous stand against the corporate criminal enterprise.

    •  Dirty money would mean that Kos has to blog (0+ / 0-)

      about how "great" and "environmentally responsible" Chevron is. He does not, and he most likely never will. Calling ad revenue "dirty money" simply because you don't like the advertiser is illogical and, in my opinion, a bit hysterical and unreasonable.

      Mariva's Guide: A magablog of fun, useful, interesting stuff.

      by mariva on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 07:57:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  one of my biggest issues with animated banner ads (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eddie Haskell, Hedwig

    is that they slow down the antique comupter that I use  much of the time.

    ```
    peace

  •  People Powered Ad Discussion (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mariva, sfRenter

    DKos can harness the power of the people, and enhance the value of ads popular with DKos users, by linking every ad to a DKos discussion of the ads. That will first relieve the pressure that unpopular ads create in the community. It will draw those meta discussions away from other discussions where they're not relevant, including open threads which usually have better subjects than an ad. And it will, through tagging, allow the people to actually keep an eye on what is advertised on DKos, and whether those advertisers actually do correlate with any position taken by DKos editorial, whether staff or just users.

    Popular ads will become more "sticky", interactive with users, who can offer the best advertising, word of "mouth", that any advertiser could want. While unpopular ones will have to be described in public to justify their unpopularity.

    Openness, transparency, fostering discussion, even improving business by interactivity. Even of the ads. That sounds like the DKos vision that I buy into.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:10:05 AM PST

  •  Let them piss their money away (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mariva

    I would like to think that we are the most discriminating kind of advertising target; the informed kind.  If a company is too thick to understand that we are a special target audience that might not be receptive to their advertising, let them piss their money away.  It only benefits us and our causes.  Whare they choose to spend their advertising dollars is their problem, not ours.

    Am I a libral? or just well informed?

    by riles on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:11:37 AM PST

  •  These are good guidelines. (5+ / 0-)

    The one thing I would do differently is place a disclaimer above the ads such as this:

    Daily Kos welcomes submissions from advertisers. Acceptance of ads does not imply endorsement of products, views, or services. Daily Kos reserves the right to promote political viewpoints contrary to the views and agendas of their advertisers.

    You could also link to the ad policy and link to the premium signup for people who especially do not want to see the ads.

    That way, it would be clear to people that acceptance of ads does not mean endorsement. I run a newspaper and run a similar disclaimer and have had few problems with people accusing me of bias.

  •  Great Idea (0+ / 0-)

    Kos is so smart.

  •  My favorite magazine (0+ / 0-)

    "The Atlantic" runs all kinda big corporate ads! I will still look forward to each and every issue. I will also continue to be a subscriber!

    You go Kos! I am with you 100%! This is America after all!

    No more gooper LITE!

    by krwada on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:14:47 AM PST

  •  APT's (4+ / 0-)

    Solution:  The Advertising Purity Trolls of America should organize and purchase a banner ad of their own.

    I can't wait to see the first ad paid for by the APTA  on Daily Kos.

    It might even draw more criticisms than Chevron, beach volleyball, and SWS* combined.

    BTW, when can we start buying ads for specific diaries or front page stories?  I want to buy one in C&J urging Bill In Portland Maine to bring back his tip jar every day!  There's a whole coalition of unions who would contribute to its cost.

    =========

    *

    If the American people can't trust the electoral system to give them a fair result, then your democracy is broken. Period. - Febble

    by Eddie Haskell on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:15:21 AM PST

  •  I like it (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mariva

    Dailykos the modern day robin hood-take from the polluters and give to the...kossacks?

    Curt Weldon-A symbol of the culture of corruption.

    by blacklib on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:18:48 AM PST

  •  Just what we needed... (4+ / 0-)

    a new type of troll, i.e. advertising purity troll.

  •  It's an endorsment (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Just enough

    no matter how you try to cushion it, it's still a subliminal endorsment.

  •  People who call people purity-ad trolls (6+ / 0-)

    Had best start shopping at Walmart again!  After all, the Walls do give better prices than some of their competition.

    Morals be damned!  We're in this to save or make a buck!

    •  I think you're confusing... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mariva

      advertising with purchasing decisions.  The two are not the same.  They're related but not the same.  If you want a more accurate analogy you should sarcastically goad Kos to accept advertising with the KKK (or CCC whatever the descendant org is).

    •  i never stopped shopping at walmart (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mariva

      they're the cheapest ones around (for new stuff)

      WE WON! LET'S ACT LIKE IT!

      by terrypinder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:55:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Then please recognise you support... (5+ / 0-)

        union-busting, hiring children and exploiting them worldwide, inhumane exploitation of human beings around the world, environmental destruction, and a number of other VERY bad things!

        We are our purchasing decisions. Just admit that.

        •  i know of all that they do (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          diplomatic, mariva, jkilkullen

          but when i think about it and the things I buy, etc.... the only way I could NOT support evil would be to live naked in a cave somewhere and eat bugs all day.

          -Google and Yahoo censor overseas. both supply my email.
          -Verizon which provides my internets spies on phone convos
          -I have yet to find a clothing store that doesn't support sweatshop labor
          I still ride the bus which uses gasoline and oil likely from Saudi Arabia or Nigeria or someplace unfriendly. Heck the steel used to build it probably was made by Chinese nearslave labor.
          -The food I eat is either farmed in environentally unfriendly conditions or laced with drugs or worse
          -Don't get me started on Microsoft

          There is a limit to my purity. I would love to not shop at or support these things but the wallet does not allow. And I gather this is the gist of what Markos is saying as well.

          In a perfect world I'd love to buy all organic, ride abike everywhere, wear clothes made by union labels or better. But we do not live in a perfect world. We have to live with these corporations. There's no way around it.

          But... I listen/Watch BBC World and not American Shill news so at least I'm doing something right.

          WE WON! LET'S ACT LIKE IT!

          by terrypinder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:14:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  fuckin crossouts (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mariva

            yeah that crossout is not supposed to be a crossout

            WE WON! LET'S ACT LIKE IT!

            by terrypinder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:14:32 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Where you have a choice and spend money (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            CSI Bentonville, sfRenter

            you can be purer than you are letting on.

            "You needed a vehicle. The vehicle was W.M.D" Paul Wolfowitz

            by Just enough on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:18:02 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Waitaminit. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            CSI Bentonville

            I would love to not shop at or support these things but the wallet does not allow. And I gather this is the gist of what Markos is saying as well.

            That's not at all what Markos is saying. He's said nothing about them except he'll take their money.

            As for purity, we all do things that pollute, that support The Dark Side, that are less than ideal and responsible and noble.

            But my brain and heart and politics and morals - I try to keep those sanitized for my protection.

            Chevron pays Markos. Markos provides DK. I post on DK.

            How much does that non-purify me? I don't know.

            It's mostly Markos who's on the slippery slope. We'll see how far he slides.  

  •  faulty logic (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Just enough, sfRenter

    Just because I've said I don't believe in unicorns that doesn't imply that I believe in tricorns. The rejection of one thing isn't the endorsement of another.

  •  Take their money and run.. (0+ / 0-)

    The policy looks fine to me.  I don't even mind the banner ads.... now that I am used to them.

  •  Rules mean approval (0+ / 0-)

    Kos has a real point there.
    Once you censor anything, you have approved everything which passes the censorship.

    •  Clearly Kos missed something (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      diplomatic, sfRenter

      Kos

      Running an ad doesn't imply endorsement. But, if I start rejecting ads, THEN every ad that DOES run has an implied endorsement.

      vs

      The Nation

      If the purpose of the advertisement is to sell a product or service rather than to express a view, we will allow ourselves greater rein in making judgments about suitability. This reflects our view that commerce is less sacrosanct than political speech [...]

      because it sounds like The Nation will censor certain companies, services and products.

      "You needed a vehicle. The vehicle was W.M.D" Paul Wolfowitz

      by Just enough on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:10:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Let my hand cast the first pie (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MissLaura, cakestick, Inland

    This site is not a public service but a profit-making business; common-sense and the IRS say so.  I applaud this.

    Those whose sensitivities to the idea that a man with kids needs to feed his family and pay his bills demand that he distract himself by exhaustively researching every client who buys advertising lest some pecksniff sniff his peck - ye Gods.

    I do not support dope dealing or larceny, but have represented people as an attorney for fee who committed those crimes (as well as some who were accused of each and did not.)  This is no different.

    People who think that they can set up a site without ads or only ads from the Sisters of Charity bake sale should fork over to Kos the same amount of money that they would have to spend to get access to the same amount of quality content, on dead trees.  You got $2,500.00 a year to send Kos?  You really ready to pay to remove the pea, Princess?

    You ready to spend $10,000+ a month on bandwidth charges to set up your own holier-than-thou site?

    No - you just want to lurk for free, pay nothing, and see only ads for Birkenstocks and peace organizations and Dennis Kucinich?

    Then, I'll say it right now, no apologies - Shut Your Fucking Pie Hole.

    Make Crablaw Maryland Weekly your source for Maryland news and commentary. (-1.88/-5.69)

    by tbrucegodfrey on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:32:04 AM PST

    •  I Agree (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mariva

      Anyone who disagrees with Kos should be run out of town.  This is a cult, not an open forum.

    •  Another perspective (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      peeder

      I don't really have any problem with the Chevron ad.  But there are ads that I would have a problem with and likely, so would you.

      If the KKK wanted to advertise on this site, and Markos allowed it, I would take my reading eyes elsewhere.  And I would not care how much they paid him.  And frankly, neither should he.

      This has very little to do with the First Amendment or even the profession of the law.

      A lawyer has a much different oath of office, especially defense attorneys, who are not doing their job to defend the KKK but doing their job to be a check on the government.  Markos has no such role.  I think that analogy doesn't work.

      He certainly has the right to take advertising dollars from wherever he likes. And his audience has a right to vote with their feet--which may cost him advertising dollars in the long run.

      So even if we're going to look at this as a pure economic equation, I'm not sure this policy is the best idea.  

      And for the record, birkenstocks are ugly. ;)

      Stephanie Dray
      of Jousting for Justice, a lefty blog with a Maryland tilt.

      by stephdray on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:24:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Agreed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfRenter

    It is a sound policy decision that could be revisited should a serious issue arise, (like attack ads on Democratic candidates). I had strong reservations about ads for the Path to 9/11.  We are for the most part intelligent and well intentioned, but no one is totally immune to the subliminal effects of a well crafted ad.

  •  KOS: Just make sure you don't criticize pols (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stephdray, diplomatic, Just enough

    for taking money from big oil while you're doing it yourself.  After all, they just need to 'put food on their family'.  And if they rejected the big oil money, it would mean that the money they accepted from others is an endorsement.

    And yes, pols are in the position to influence policy.  So is KOS.

  •  Before we start complaining about the ads... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mariva, jkilkullen

    ...we'd have to stop driving cars that use petroleum products, and I haven't given up my wheels.  I say take the money and don't worry about it.

    8786 more Virginians approve of this message.

    by Pain on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:40:22 AM PST

    •  exactly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mariva

      most of us drive.

      I don't but I ride the bus, which uses petroleum. Or I get someone else to drive me around, which uses up gas. Meaning I'm just as guilty as those who drive all on their own.
      take the cash and stop worrying.

      WE WON! LET'S ACT LIKE IT!

      by terrypinder on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:43:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  no, i can complain about the ads right now. (0+ / 0-)

      some are hypocrites to accept their money while obstensively opposing them.

      some are hypocrites to actively oppose them while living in a manner or in a society which depends on their products.

      some are hypocrites by not opposing them while claiming to be "environmentalist" or "progressive" or what not.

      We're all hypocrites, it's part of being human.  This hypocrite opposes big-oil, and isn't entirely pleased to have them advertise here.  But, it's kos's site: THAT hypocrite can run it however he chooses.

      Power Corrupts. Proof: Mark Kirk, IL-10.

      by sfRenter on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:27:20 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Ask me if I buy (0+ / 0-)

      gas from Chevron?

      Answer: nope. Citgo.

  •  This policy works when the ad is pre-paid (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stephdray, mariva

    But I run Google AdSense ads on my blog and I WILL use the competitive ad filter to weed out "unclickable" ads, e.g., Ann Coulter's book ad.

    Simply put, I don't want to waste ad real estate becasue if I get no clicks, I get no ad money.

    I'd rather give the space to a person or organization that is liberal/progressive.  

  •  Let's take their money (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    diplomatic, jkilkullen

    That being said, God do I hate seeing that fucker Glenn Beck glaring at me every time I visit.  

    "Extremist agenda" my ass.

    I'll ignore what I am sure were the best of your intentions; we are judged by our actions and not by our pretensions. --Billy Bragg

    by cbathrob on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:50:46 AM PST

  •  Kos, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mariva

    Make all the f-ing money you can and spend it on whatever the F you want; Vegas, booze, the track, mutual funds, race cars, whatever. If I don't like it I can start my own blog. Pay yourself first, party like a Democrat.

    We will fight. We will win. This machine kills fascists.

    by Elvis meets Nixon on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:53:35 AM PST

  •  I find the constant Kos pandering troubling (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    diplomatic

    at times. Using people's money against them seems like a rationalization for taking money by allowing companies to continue to imprint their message in all locations. Commerce regardless of the damage it causes gets a free ride. This is kos' show and we are only witnesses but let us speak the truth.

    "You needed a vehicle. The vehicle was W.M.D" Paul Wolfowitz

    by Just enough on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:54:51 AM PST

    •  "gets a free ride"? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      clonecone

      Go write a diary.  Nobody gets a free ride here EXCEPT YOU.  They pay dollars to advertise and you get to write a rebuttal FOR FREE.

      But nobody ever writes that diary.  Wonder why.

      It's the proto-fascism

      by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:45:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The free ride is not being held accountable to (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        reflectionsv37, GinaNY

        any extent that hurts.

        I'm not getting a free ride but rather creating the content for free along with others that somehow draws the volume that makes this site worth visiting.

        (Please don't use CAPS so often as they don't help your argument.)

        "You needed a vehicle. The vehicle was W.M.D" Paul Wolfowitz

        by Just enough on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:53:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Um. Making the site "worth visiting" (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          clonecone, jkilkullen

          is of no value unless kos sells advertising.  Besides patting yourself on your own back for somehow making the site popular, you still end up at the point where being popular, in and of itself, doesn't make any money and in fact makes running the site MORE expensive.  

          At some point, advertising has to be sold or subscriptions taken.  But clearly, this is a problem that you aren't volunteering to solve.  You just comment here.  It's up to Kos to figure out a way to fund the site according to YOUR values.  Oh, well.    

          And as to holding Chevron accountable "to any extent that it hurts", I suggest that denying it an advertising opportunity isn't exactly a punishment that rocks its world.  

          IOW, you are contributing zippo helpful to the issue of funding the site, and I think that's your intent.  I suspect that you are making a purity statement that literally costs you nothing, that puts the problem of funding the site on someone else, and even absolves you of the bother of writing those anti Chevron diaries that nobody ever bothers to write.  

          It's the proto-fascism

          by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:14:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Don't be so pompous. (4+ / 0-)

            I was not patting myself on the back but stating what the transaction is on site like Kos where the reader/writer content is much greater than that of the leadership/organizer. The variety created by network effect creates and interesting place to read, write and share opinions generally without attack.

            It is a community with differing perspectives and you have taken it upon yourself to take on everyone who differs with what Kos has shared as his take on allowing open advertising.

            I (as you are) am not privy to the finances of this company and we have not been asked to solve any problem. We are just giving feedback on a guideline that was shared with us due to feedback posted freely from the community.

            If Kos asks for solutions I would happily offer some but until then try to control your lecturing of others. It gets old.

            "You needed a vehicle. The vehicle was W.M.D" Paul Wolfowitz

            by Just enough on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:24:42 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Don't put the burdens of your purity on Kos. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              clonecone, jkilkullen

              And I get to be pompous....apparently, I'm providing greater content to the site than kos, and that gives me the right to comment on how he pays for my ability to post without offering any alternative.  Who knew?  

              And I get to lecture, too...as long as it's not you, because you not only lectured kos, you lectured everyone else as "pandering" to him in a "troubling" fashion. It's the latest purity rage.

              And I get credit for solutions, too...but only if someone says "mother may I", because while everyone can comment on kos, on the value that they add to the site, on how kos is pandered to, on how many caps to use in a comment, on who gets to lecture and who doesn't, actual CONSTRUCTIVE comments are precious and not to be ladled out with the usual dreck.  Yep, only personal attacks allowed.  That's what builds that valuable content you were talking about, right?

              What a load.  Kos wins, you lose.  GBCW if you don't like it.

              It's the proto-fascism

              by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:39:24 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Where is all that anger coming from? (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                reflectionsv37, Cantinflas, GinaNY

                Your arguments are emotional, disjointed and confusing at times to me. If you think anyone is persuaded to your POV with that manner of hot exchange then I have some very bad news for you but then you have probably already received this feedback from your friends.

                "You needed a vehicle. The vehicle was W.M.D" Paul Wolfowitz

                by Just enough on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:55:09 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  It's not anger. It's an analysis. (0+ / 0-)

                  An analysis of your series of posts, which exhibit a number of hypocrises and the tiresome of purity and yet, won't respond to any of the points I make.

                  But calling it anger and giving yourself the right to give me a failing grade is what you feel excuses you from any attempt to support your position, besides calling on that bottomless well of purity..  Whatever.  It's the eternal out of the purity troll.

                  It's the proto-fascism

                  by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 06:11:27 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You just don't get it. Your type of (0+ / 0-)

                    rants and "thinking-lite" analysis can more often be found at Redstate.com. where you'd fit in better given your natural attack mode towards those that have a different point of view.

                    You have annoyed a number of people here today with your self righteousness and yes - anger. Let it rest.


                    "And we are here as on a darkling plain Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, Where ignorant armies clash by night." Matthew Arnold

                    by Cantinflas on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 06:56:44 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Oh, pooh. What crap. (0+ / 0-)

                      You can read from the first comment to the diary on, and if you really found MY comments to be the self righteous ones, then all I can say is that you must agree with the purity of the poster but for reasons of your own would rather pretend it's about tone, or anger, or some other editorial difference.   Whatever.

                      It's the proto-fascism

                      by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 08:30:12 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  You just don't get it. Your type of (0+ / 0-)

                    rants and "thinking-lite" analysis can more often be found at Redstate.com. where you'd fit in better given your natural attack mode towards those that have a different point of view.

                    You have annoyed a number of people here today with your self righteousness and yes - anger. Let it rest.


                    "And we are here as on a darkling plain Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, Where ignorant armies clash by night." Matthew Arnold

                    by Cantinflas on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 06:58:02 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Inland, would you please stop? (0+ / 0-)

                    Stop annoying Chevron's customers and CNN's viewers? Don't hurt the consumer's morale. It's bad for the economy. Please, for the love of god, just click on an advertisement and shop!

                    Tommorrow we'll Walmart and McDonald's ads, and that's okay too.

                    As a matter of fact, we can use the wiki script to make every mention of a corporation becomes a link to their website, then we each pull a commission for the traffic our rants against them generate for them.

                    Be the alien you want to see in the world.

                    by PaulGaskin on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 07:36:19 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Well, where ARE those anticorporate diaries? (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      PaulGaskin

                      Every time someone complains about ads giving people the wrong idea, as if that could happen, I invite them to write diaries giving the right idea.  But instead, the complaints pretty much begin and end at what dkos does.  It's a puzzlement.

                      It's the proto-fascism

                      by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 08:37:41 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Don't you worry... (0+ / 0-)

                        I've got a few ideas which have yet to see the light of day...

                        I won't call it "anti-corporate", I'll just call it uncompromising.

                        Be the alien you want to see in the world.

                        by PaulGaskin on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:25:26 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  You can't control yourself can you? (0+ / 0-)

                        What is your point? Is it that one can't have an opinion on corporate advertising unless you write one or more anti corporate diaries? What logic is that based on?

                        Or is it that you haven't seen any anti corporate dairies here (a mistaken idea you can cure yourself of by looking through the ALL TAGS and you will find plenty - even some on Chevron). I don't know why that would be relevant.

                        I really can't tell what your points are from how you express yourself in writing.

                        Advertising is all about giving out the "right" idea as far as the advertiser is concerned and when the advertiser is unscrupulous then their advertising copy most times follow their ethics. Do you have a problem following that (?) and why some people might have issues with certain companies advertising here. Just stay with that point and don't switch to any others and you will get to the core of the concerns.

                        Advertising: 1 : to make something known to : NOTIFY
                        2 a : to make publicly and generally known <advertising their readiness to make concessions> b : to announce publicly especially by a printed notice or a broadcast c : to call public attention to especially by emphasizing desirable qualities so as to arouse a desire to buy or patronize


                        "And we are here as on a darkling plain Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, Where ignorant armies clash by night." Matthew Arnold

                        by Cantinflas on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:13:44 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  You think I'm supposed to validate your feelings. (0+ / 0-)

                          That's why you assert that i don't understand that people "have a problem" with corporate advertising on the site.  I realize that fact.  I just don't think it's a feeling and that I have to validate as if it weren't misplaced.

                          So I guess I won't "just stop", and I certainly aren't going to repeat myself because you pretend you don't understand my posts.  The most recent was two whole sentences long. It's beyond me to make them any simpler.  Try reading the diary.  I agree with that.

                          It's the proto-fascism

                          by Inland on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 06:15:00 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

              •  Wow - the real life Avenging Angel of Kos (3+ / 0-)

                The hottest places in hell are reserved for those, who in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. - Dante

                by GinaNY on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:59:36 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  Hmmm...I don't believe for one minute The Nation. (0+ / 0-)

    would accept an ad from Chevron or an arms dealer. I've NEVER seen a corporate ad in that magazine. You are not off the hook. If ads take a decidely conservative turn, I'll not return.

  •  heh (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    diplomatic

    one day you'll realize that you are your own man -- that ethical position that enjoins economic and moral outcomes that "libertarian democrats" fear to own, so avoid judgement of their own ethics, their business practices and political cant.

    the nation so affirms.

    recall, however: risk is the fear you act alone and is atemporal. good is the invisible act, atemporal and ignored. deprivation or depredation is obvious, present and historic. do you personally need to be obvious? or "credit" worthy?

    perhaps you are worried that there is insufficient numbers of advertisers possessing political and operational "democratic" integrity to support site operations. perhaps there are insufficient numbers of paying subscribers. there's a tell on a number of levels that cannot justify the purported purposes of the blog.

    i do not believe dr. dean would approve.

    don't push judgement on to your "subscriber" consensus ... or uncertainty ... or numerology, because CW permits, because you'll ignore that judgement anyway, if the decision tree to margins map the path of least resistance.

    do you know all your options?

    promote your own authority as proprietory to judge the value and utility of democratic "value", to define your business at large. in another world, that judgement is called leadership; you set the limits of appropriate behavior and goals for your organization.

    trust yourself, rather than the opportunity, in this case, straddling the "gate". we're supposed to crash it; after all, the blog depends, is populated, by the productive effort of wholy independent creators whose only incentive to produce is feelings of sympathy and convenience.

    if you ignore this factor, you'll be left with another statistical insignificance infotainment site and a MSM talking head job search.

    Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

    by MarketTrustee on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 10:59:05 AM PST

    •  p.s. (0+ / 0-)

      if you reject a certain advertiser, is an alternative channel available? for example, what is your price for an advertiser "subscriber" account, rent, to publish opinions, management intentions, or organizational accomplishments?

      such a channel turns passive reception (push, impression, banner numerology) on its ear. in another world, this "level" of engagement (or market capture) is called "editorial" advertising. its efficacy will sink or swim according to dkos response -- onsite, verifiable, traffic.

      have you explored this option?

      Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

      by MarketTrustee on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:15:41 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  A policy of engagement (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Geotpf, sfRenter, jkilkullen

    The Chevron ad did a lot of good.  It got us talking about Chevron.  I learned some unsavory things about Chevron because of that ad and the discussion it generated.

    I support a policy of engagement.  The more interdependent we are, the more we influence one another.  Yes, there's a risk that Chevron could influence us, but there's also an opportunity, that WE could influence Chevron.  Chevron is here because they want our business.  We need to tell Chevron what WE want from Chevron.

    I'm not afraid of Chevron.  DKOS is PEOPLE-POWERED, and that beats oil, any day.

  •  I like the Chevron ad (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfRenter

    but the day we can't speak freely is the day we all team up and nominate or create a new website with the same people sans Kos.

    The conditions and policies that create Islamic terror will not change under Democratic Party rule.

    by LandSurveyor on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:02:24 AM PST

  •  sounds good to me (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jkilkullen

    Do what you need to do, Kos. You built this site from the ground-up, and I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt about editorial and advertising control.

  •  Complete hogwash (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mariva

    You gotta' lotta' nerve, Markos, saying...

    ...And you guys aren't idiots...

    Everyone knows this isn't true.  Exhibit One.

    I'm with Bob.  Defense rests.

    If the American people can't trust the electoral system to give them a fair result, then your democracy is broken. Period. - Febble

    by Eddie Haskell on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:04:57 AM PST

  •  If you don't like Chevron (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Inland, jkilkullen

    write a diary about it.  They'll be paying you to do it.  

    "A fundamentalist is someone who hates sin more than he loves virtue."--John Schaar

    by Guglielmo on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:15:17 AM PST

  •  In the US there is not much difference between (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfRenter

    political and commercial free speech. Having the Nation's standard is the same as offering most favored nation to every nation or not a much of a standard. Take the money and run my amigo but call it what it is - Kos is about to go commercial and that is a milestone!

    If the purpose of the advertisement is to sell a product or service rather than to express a view, we will allow ourselves greater rein in making judgments about suitability. This reflects our view that commerce is less sacrosanct than political speech
    [...]


    "And we are here as on a darkling plain Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, Where ignorant armies clash by night." Matthew Arnold

    by Cantinflas on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:31:15 AM PST

  •  GE will be next to advertise here (0+ / 0-)

    "We bring good things to life"? Yea, as long as they're not profiting from war.

  •  Dear Markos... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfRenter

    Thanks for the feedback on the Chevron Ad.

    I think your point about balance is reinforced by the ad you're running about the woman with cancer who's battling Chevron.

    I guess I'll reinforce your point again by providing some balance to the Glenn Beck ad and the CNN ads myself.

    Be the alien you want to see in the world.

    by PaulGaskin on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:42:58 AM PST

  •  It's MONEY. (0+ / 0-)

    Actually, the easiest money possible.  Where does it come from?  Who cares?  It makes the site possible or buys Markos a vacation or whatever.  

    All the harms are so contingent and speculative and trivial, they couldn't compare with the benefit of cash to run the site.  I would even take money from quasi illegal outfits like the Klan, because unlike an ad in a Highlights Magazine, an ad here is hardly even read, much less changing any minds.

    It's a no brainer.

    It's the proto-fascism

    by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:44:04 AM PST

  •  I agree with Markos (0+ / 0-)

    Which I why I also eschew all those namby-pamby socially conscious funds and invest my money where it makes the best return, whether it be arms dealing, sweat-shops, or child prostitution....

    Seriously, I applaud Markos for being honest and once again reminding us all that he was a Republican before he became a nominal Democrat.

  •  Advertiser Threads (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfRenter, jkilkullen

    Hey, bring 'em on.  Let it be known that each new advertisement will generate a specific thread of commentary, exploring the advertiser's products, policies, agenda, etc.  Let the education begin.

  •  My policy on people who take money from oil (0+ / 0-)

    companies: It's a free country and you are free to be a capitalist - but don't be a whiny baby when people call you on your whoredom. Republicans make no apologies for their amorality when it comes to money. They are absolutely consistent about the fact that they would stab their own mother with a rusty hypodermic needle if doing so would net them an extra dollar - that is capitalism - and there is no grey area inbetween so don't try to rationalize the fact that you are taking money from oil companies and putting it to good use - it's a bullshit argument. Better to tell us all to fuck off and not tell you how to run your business. Because that is what you are saying anyway isn't it?

    Now, people had lost their fear. From that moment I knew we would win. - Oscar Olivera

    by Josh Prophet on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 11:56:16 AM PST

    •  What a fucking hypocrite. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jkilkullen

      I don't see you volunteering to pay a subscripion.  No, you just use the free site that's paid for by oil money while pretending you aren't getting any benefit from it at all.  No, it's all evil Markos who is benefiting from oil money to provide a free site, wherein you can criticize him for doing so.

      It's a free country and you can be a hypocrite in using a site paid for with money you pretend to detest...well, that's it.  You can be a hypocrite, and you are.

      It's the proto-fascism

      by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:39:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh shut the fuck up (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        reflectionsv37, sfRenter

        You didn't even read my post. I could give a shit who Kos takes money from, it's his trying to rationalize it that makes me sick. If Kos doesn't give a shit what  Chevron has done in Ecuador that's his business but don't try to rationalize taking money from a dirty murder machine thinking that blood doesn't rub off because it's all over this site and it renders hollow any criticism of the oil industry overseas.

        Now, people had lost their fear. From that moment I knew we would win. - Oscar Olivera

        by Josh Prophet on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:26:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Amen!!! n/t (0+ / 0-)

          Happy days are here again!!!!!

          by reflectionsv37 on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:07:46 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  If you wrote (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jkilkullen

          a cogent diary criticizing the oil industry overseas and posted it on this site, why, oh why would it be rendered hollow?  Or are you just more worried about "whoredom" than you are the oil industry?

          "A fundamentalist is someone who hates sin more than he loves virtue."--John Schaar

          by Guglielmo on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:40:24 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Nothing is going to change in this country (0+ / 0-)

            or world for that matter until we start shaming corporations into becoming moral beings. The only way to do that is to reject them commercially. It's really funny to me that people still question why 9/11 happened. The reason why is because of companies like Chevron bullying economically poor countries into raping their resources on the cheap. There would be no Daily Kos if it weren't for the Bush administration and 9/11. I've been around here since the beginning and I know that blogging rightly grew out of disgust for the war. The fact that Kos has forgotten that this war was started by oil companies and now even takes their money makes me sad.  

            Now, people had lost their fear. From that moment I knew we would win. - Oscar Olivera

            by Josh Prophet on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:58:03 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  We can reject them commercially (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Inland

              by not giving them any money.  I can boycott a company yet still be happy when they donate money to a worthy cause--I'll not begrudge that one bit.  

              Really though, I don't know of a single case where a corporation changed a practice because people wouldn't TAKE there money.  They change when people don't GIVE them money.  Anyway, there is delicious irony in using a forum partially supported by Chevron, to criticize them or their confederates.

              I see your point, but...      

              "A fundamentalist is someone who hates sin more than he loves virtue."--John Schaar

              by Guglielmo on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 04:25:02 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Here's the problem (0+ / 0-)

                Chevron has no chance of influencing a behemoth like Kos - the man or the the site, but that's not what they are trying to do. By receiving the validation of the top dog that makes it all the much easier to influence the weaker followers. Example: When the Rolling Stones allow one of their songs to be used in a car commercial then who is some smaller less successful band to not take the money? Kos sets the tone for the entire blogosphere. Maybe he doesn't want to be a role model like all those drug addled football players - but you don't get to choose that do you? If Kos says it's ok to take oil money then maybe a smaller liberal blogger will think twice when Chevron offers him 10x his usual ad rate to say a couple of nice things on his blog about Chevron. This is how the world of PR works - and Kos is playing right into their hands.

                Now, people had lost their fear. From that moment I knew we would win. - Oscar Olivera

                by Josh Prophet on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 05:06:20 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  Jeez, a hypocrite caught. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          clonecone

          that blood doesn't rub off because it's all over this site

          "All over this site" that you are participating in, without charge.  

          And even though it "renders hollow any criticism", here you are. Because you aren't criticizing the oil companies, you're criticizing Kos for doing just what you are doing....participating in a blog with oil money.

          What a fucking hypocrite you are!  YOu dont' even try to rationalize YOUR actions, thinking that you somehow got dibs on outrage and purity and therefore you can't do the consistent thing, like leave and make your own pure blog.

          Of course, the fact is, only a purity troll would argue that oil company money taints the entire blog and every word on it.  But whatever.  

          It's the proto-fascism

          by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 06:27:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

      "Name me someone who's not a parasite, and I'll go out and say a prayer for him"
                       
                      - Bob dylan, Visions of Johanna

      Well Stanley, here's another fine mess you've gotten us into.

      by native on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:26:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Who loves ya, baby? (0+ / 0-)

    The advertising purity trolls seem to think that site readers are moron automatons easily manipulated by advertising. I have a higher opinion of you guys.

    I'll admit, I'm one of the guys that complained about the chevron ad. I complained because they're on a list of Iraq-war profiteers. But I do respect the intelligence of the readers of this site. I have a very high opinion of you guys.

    Finally, I'm not afraid of money, and I'm putting it to good use -- the abandonment of Scoop and a massive ground-up redevelopment of Daily Kos to be the ultimate blogging platform in the world, and the establishment of a corps of "fellows" to do great activism.

    Will it be free software? Will it be PHP or Java( Java was just GPL'd, BTW), perhaps Ruby? Surely not .net from M$.

    This is fascinating.

    Be the alien you want to see in the world.

    by PaulGaskin on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:00:28 PM PST

  •  Wrong, wrong, wrong. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stephdray

    Per the logic of KOS, any politician who takes money from Big Oil may claim these excuses when answering to his critics:

    1. I'm not afraid of money. Are you?
    1. My constituents are quite intelligent. They know even thought I willingly take Big Oil money, Big Oil won't influence my decisions.
    1. If I refuse to take money from Big Oil, then it's implied that I endorse the views of those contributors that I do take money from ... I mean ... er ...
    1. Silly people, I'm not accepting Big Oil money so I can advance Big Oil's cause. I'm taking Big Oil money to get elected.
    1. Sure I take money from Big Oil. But so do my harshest critics, like those lefties over at DailyKos.

    "Democrats have the heart to care."

    by jeepdad on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:07:49 PM PST

    •  Anyone can claim anything. (0+ / 0-)

      But then, they have a voting records to look at, too, to see if they are lying.

      The Daily Kos allows you to put foward a diary a day against big oil....free.  

      The proof of the pudding is in the eating.  Taking advertiser's money has NO effect on content.  None.

      It's the proto-fascism

      by Inland on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 12:48:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't see Representatives and Senators allowing (0+ / 0-)

      ... any constituent to submit material which is read on the House or Senate floor and goes straight into the Congressional record without prior censorship.

  •  Don't make excuses for your capitalism and (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Geotpf, sfRenter

    don't whine when you get hammered for the choices you make.  I'm all for Mr. Moore's path, "take their money and drive your truck through the giant hole they leave open," or something to that effect.  As long as Mr. Moulitsas allows free and open debate and criticism of advertisers and particular advertisments, then he's the only one who has to reconcile his conscience with his bank account.

    Given that there are plenty of less objectionable businesses likely willing to advertise here, one wonders why Mr. Moulitsas is so eager to accept particular advertising.  Maybe big money corporate advertisers are the path of least resistence to Mr. Moulitsas' future ends.  I'm not being critical only curious.  Much is made on this web site over perceived conflicts of interest rooted in the acceptance of money in politics.  Is it any less appropriate to question Mr. Moulitsas' integrity in this regard?    

    •  Free and Open debate . . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jkilkullen

      cost money for a community as large as one as this. This community, and other netroots sites like it, have been instrumental in helping turning the political tide, as last weeks elections demonstrate. I would say that the money put into this site is a significant investment that has paid a very high return.

      Now, if some corporations wish to put their money advertising towards this kind of community, I have no problem with it, because it is a marketplace of ideas, where the best ones win. (And last week they did win!)

      Chevron advertises on a site like this because this is a site where
      a) key issues that affect a corporation like Chevron; and
      b) a Corporation like Chevron affects issues

      are discussed.

      It makes sense that such an organisation would want to target part of their webvertising to a site such as this: after all, environment, energy efficiency and security of supply are discussed here, right?

      Therefore, while I'm not so naive as to believe that the majority of ideas held here are going to change Chevron's direction overnight - or at all, for that matter - by advertising here, they are also going to follow what is discussed here. And by following that, they might see that there is a business proposition in it.

      The basic premise is that if a corporation smells that money can be made out of something, they'll try and pursue it. If they become more aware of the issues that thrive in this community, and see that this lives more among the mainstream than they've hitherto been aware of, perhaps that will help them change their tune. After all, what is wrong with making money while going green?

      The oil majors are no saints, but if any kind of rational debate is to be had, let's not close our eyes, cover our ears and bleat "LA! LA! LA! LA!" ad nauseam. At least a discussion should be had, one that is rooted in facts and rationality. I work in the energy industry: constructive engagement is the only way forward to resolving the most significant issues of our time, but shutting the door on even the presence of advertising by stakeholders in this discussion, shuts the door on engagement and dialogue in the wider sense.

      I think that there is a far greater cost to conscience in not wishing to take part in dialogue to advance the causes we believe in and thereby merely end up shouting at ourselves, than Kos' perceived dent in his conscience in accepting money from a corporation to help fund a site that allows us to have this discussion in the first place.

      "Ah, just think about it . . . a week in Paris, and he'll come back sounding just like . . . Marcel Marceau" - Gotcha (1985)

      by mierts on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:39:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  There was a similar discussion over Whole Foods (0+ / 0-)

        People where divided between the Whole Foods supermarket company

        • as "good" (raising awareness of ethical and ecological issues related to food, nice place to shop while having a clearer conscience than one might at other chains)
        • and as "evil" (higher prices, founder is a libertarian with what some saw as strong rightist tendencies, food sourcing not really as green or ecologically beneficial as claimed / not locally grown).
  •  Kos (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfRenter, jkilkullen

    You do whatever you have to do honey to keep  this up and running..When we are small and they are big we accept their money and advertising ..This makes them give us the means to be  stronger..I know you could be making a lot more money doing something other than this but you really do care and that is why you are doing this..I say go for it..

  •  Agree and Applaud (0+ / 0-)

    I agree with your logic and purpose.  I have watched you do things with great purpose and integrity.  I am just starting my second year as a subscriber.  I will continue that as long as I feel you are doing a good job.

    I am one of those folks that are usually considered lurkers.  I have really appreciated your leadership. Please keep up the good work.

    Thanks

    =eas=

  •  Adervertiser/Commentary Links (0+ / 0-)

    Hey, Markos, how about this:  You accept any advertiser you want, per the Nation guidelines, BUT you require each advertiser to permit a link embedded in the ad to commentary from DailyKos readers on the product or company advertised.  Win/win:  Operating capital AND reader education.

  •  It's your site Markos... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    highacidity, sfRenter

    ... do what you want. And I agree, for the most part, with your new advertising policy. I would just remind you to be careful. Look what has happened to some local PBS stations that have accepted ads from corporate entities. Great pressure is sometimes put on them to tone down their programming or become more 'fair and balanced'. You could find yourself in a dicey financial situation if a large part of your ad revenue is from corporatist organizations and they suddenly pull all their ads (or threaten to) because of content on the site. Money is power too. I'm just saying.

    Man has only those rights he can defend -- Jack McCoy

    by danno50 on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 01:25:15 PM PST

    •  i'm pretty sure Markos is smart enough not (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      highacidity

      to let that happen.  And we found just how independent he is when he stood up to the pressure to endorse Warner.

      There are a TON of organizations that want to advertise on dKos, and I'm sure Markos will take a little less money from advertisers to make sure he stays pressure-free.

      CA-50: exile Brian Bilbray from Congress in 2008.

      by thereisnospoon on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:32:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Dirty Money! (0+ / 0-)

    Call me a purity troll, but when you take dirty money you become part of the problem!  It is a slippery slope that so many have slipped down in the past.

  •  i've got no objection to any of that (0+ / 0-)

    I love these ideas.  The future belongs to US.

    CA-50: exile Brian Bilbray from Congress in 2008.

    by thereisnospoon on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:29:55 PM PST

  •  Thanks for treating us as individuals. (0+ / 0-)

    I have a higher opinion of you guys. I actually think you're quite intelligent and capable of independent evaluation of the advertising you consume here and elsewhere.

     Oh, if you need a bean counter in that proposed corp of "fellows", let me know.

    My Karma just ran over your Dogma

    by FoundingFatherDAR on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 02:41:41 PM PST

    •  Bean counters rock! People don't appreciate that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CSI Bentonville

      ... accountants and auditors are society's "thin blue line" of defense against white-collar organized crime, corruption, and fraud. They're the real deal, our financial CSI in an age where massive capital flows are just electronic and optical pulses or magnetic spots on a disk.

      •  The honest ones like me anyway. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lotlizard, CSI Bentonville

        Unfortunately, I've known too many who cross over that thin blue line, and side with with their client, or whichever side will make them the most $$ and advance their career the fastest.  
         Which is why I'm currently unemployed, because I'm not willing to "go along (to get along)" with their "agressive" interpretations of the law.  The lessons of Enron, et al still have not been learned.

        My Karma just ran over your Dogma

        by FoundingFatherDAR on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 02:08:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  you run ads? (0+ / 0-)

    Aloha Kos,

    Ok - I've been reading DailyKos for quite some time now - I don't really know how long, but quite awhile. I was reading it about a year before I actually signed up :)

    In any event the ads don't bother me. In fact, I (gasp) hardly even notice them! Probably not a good endorsement for seeking new ad sponsors but there it is.

    I would much rather have you run ads - even ads that don't agree with the point of view here, than not have DailyKos! Tihs is a huge site with lots of daily hits. I have no idea how much it costs to run the site, but I know you are constantly upgrading equipment to meet demand & then there's bandwidth & probably a gazillion things none of us would ever think of. So, do whatever you need to do. We can handle it :)

    Morague

  •  Nietzsche said .. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PaulGaskin

    "None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free."

    Kos, you lose credibility and open yourself up to attack with such a wide open "policy."  Why limit yourself and your the impact you can make?  Is it worth it?  

    Stay free!!!  

  •  False advertising not acceptable. (0+ / 0-)
    The problem is not the "views" of Chevron.  It's the exact content of the advertisement, which contains demonstrably false claims, and links to a page with a bunch more demonstrably false claims.

    Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not to their own facts.  Chevron appears to think that it's entitled to its own facts.  That's the standard necessary: no false advertising.

    The Nation's policy doesn't say anything about this issue at all.  Accordingly, Kos, your entire front-page article is a strawman and doesn't address the controversy at all.

    Please try again.

    -5.63, -8.10 | Libertarian Liberal

    by neroden on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 03:48:54 PM PST

  •  Up there it's their time. Down here it's our time (0+ / 0-)

    Sorry to jump on board with this discussion so late, but here's my 2-3 cents.

    1. I find it hard to think of Chevron's advertising budget in any relation to censorship or first Amendment rights. I hardly consider Chevron to be unheard.
    1. Kos, I flatly disagree - what you allow on your page in terms of advertisements does imply endorsement. Otherwise, why would we care where our politicians got their money from? It's the same thing - money for face time.
    1. Most importantly - we're bombarded with advertising from the oil companies, the phone companies, the HMOs, the drug companies, and on and on and on. For many of us, DailyKos is a respite from the corporate dominated world/media we all live in.

    Face it, we're the Goonies. And up there, up there it's their time. But down here - down here it's our time.

    •  please watch that collective terminology. (0+ / 0-)

      "our"?  When did you start speaking for all of this blog's users?

      Has it occured to you that Kos may be being true to his principles, but not necessarily to yours, and that's o.k.?  That his principles are honorable to him, just different from the line you would draw?

      Everyone here defines their personal principles a little differently, and likely believes in them passionately and that they are honorable. They should be allowed to do this.  If you don't think so, if instead you think your interpretation is the only right one, well...you're no better than the hard-right extremists.  I cannot support either extreme.

      •  Dear jkilkullen: just because one holds (0+ / 0-)

        "beliefs" passionately doesn't necessarily make them honorable or right.  It simply makes them one's beliefs based upon his or her morally subjective fundamental principles.  It is fair to say we all have a right to believe as we chose, but it doesn't necessarily follow that our beliefs are "right, correct or moral" simply because they are believed by us passionately. Myriad examples exist throughout history to illustrate this point.  I will let you discover them for yourself.  Having said this, the only beliefs that are truly threatening are those that are held in spite of all objectively discernible facts or arguments in opposition suggesting one's beliefs are either morally repugnant, logically/rationally inconsistent, or based merely on faith.  Beliefs based merely on faith in their moral superiority can also be either right or wrong, generally only time, introspective soul searching, debate and study, and death will tell the tale.

        •  well, you've out-pompoused me (0+ / 0-)

          I add only that
          something you find rationally inconsistent in one context, could actually be rational in a different context. If you find something rationally inconsistent, why is your context the right way to look at it?

    •  Nothing wrong with a little snack on our time... (0+ / 0-)

      Sorry, couldn't resist.

      But "Fast Times" is a far, far better use of "our time" than the Goonies ever could have been...

  •  Ads do work. But this issue isn't black & white. (0+ / 0-)

    I think advertising does work. It's why people will pay for it. It's why I find myself whistling jingles of products I didn't realize I had seen commercials for. People here can and do think, but are also as susceptible to the conditioning of repeated exposure to branding as anyone. You can't just write it off.

    I also don't think that refusing advertising from major bad guys means that you're necessarily endorsing all the others. I mean let's get Halliburton in here, why don't we. KBR and Blackwater could use a few good men, I'm sure. It just means that those allowed in aren't necessarily known for eating babies. If it winds up coming out that any of them do eat a large volume of babies, you can stop taking their money on that case by case basis and not worry too much that you're endorsing others. I just don't think it's so clean to just wash your hands of the issue, throw them up and say, "I'm helpless!"

    I work for an issue-centric nonprofit and we won't take money from anyone in a certain industry that is the most heinous and deliberate promoter of the problem we seek to remedy. But we'll take money from other ruthless behemoths in other industries. My jaw dropped open when I heard about one donor recently, because I didn't feel it was right that they should profit by displaying association with us. But the response from leadership was that the only thing wrong with that kind of money is that there isn't more of it. Lives depend on that money, regardless of whatever other problems are associated with it.

    So that latter idea squares with what Kos is saying here. If Chevron wants to help fund a grassroots catalyst and meetingplace, much of which acts against its interests and wants to change the system it feeds off of, we can take the money and laugh. It would be admittedly harder here to filter all the zillions of companies we might have problems with as the broad Left. My group has it much easier with a single issue and single obvious target. It would become awfully cumbersome to constantly scrutinize every company that came in the door. I think some effort might be nice, though. I mean look at the BuyBlue kind of ideas, or that Wikipedia-like site that tracks corporate behavior. They seem to make a decent effort. Not perfect, and it doesn't guarantee how consumers will behave, but it's good info and a step in the right direction.

    But some of Kos's explanation and supporting comments do sound like a bit of creative squirming to convince ourselves things like this are completely fine. I think eyes wide with dollar signs in them (even for a good cause) tend to try extra hard to find those silver linings and come up with rationalizations that allow the soul to be at peace. Whatever. As with most things, it's not black and white. It's not the end of the world if the ads are here, and nobody has to click on them. If you're really offended, block them. Chevron will do fine either way, as will Daily Kos. I think we have much bigger fish to fry.

    "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." -F.D.

    by Your Brother on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 07:10:16 PM PST

  •  I understand this ad upset some people (0+ / 0-)

    ass_for_the_working_class

    I didn't have a problem with it. The working class needs ass too. It shouldn't be just the elite who can get ass on demand.

    Be the alien you want to see in the world.

    by PaulGaskin on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 07:50:23 PM PST

  •  But will Chevron advertise (0+ / 0-)

    on Air America?

    Speech in this country is free, you hack!

    -5.88, -6.82

    by Debby on Tue Nov 14, 2006 at 09:54:12 PM PST

  •  really (0+ / 0-)

    Finally, I'm not afraid of money, and I'm putting it to good use...

    Sez who?

    You'd take money from NAMBLA then? Or Neo-Nazis? Seems to me you don't like taking a stand against corporate interests. Color me unsurprised.

  •  To ask a probably oversimple question: (0+ / 0-)

    to whom does one direct a query about placing advertising at DailyKos?

    As a book editor I'd like to steer some clients to this site, at least to learn about the parameters as compared to other advetising options, when the subject matter seems appropriate.

  •  massive ground-up redevelopment of Daily Kos... (0+ / 0-)

    ...sounds like you're gonna need some l33t hax0rs. Where can we send our resumes?

  •  I think it's pretty crappy (0+ / 0-)

    that you'd call people who disagree with you "purity trolls" who are simply insulting everyone here.  It's a sad attempt by you to make those who disagree with you into the enemy.  You speak of these "purity trolls" calling readers of DK "easily manipulated", yet you must think that yourself, as you're obviously manipulating those who want to stay on your good side.  You've just told every reader of this blog that the new enemy is the "purity troll", the person who disagrees with you about advertising, so now all you have to do is sit back and wait for the suck-ups to take it upon themselves to keep "purity trolls" in line for you.

    It makes me realize you don't care about propaganda or personal attacks... unless it's used against you.  When these tactics are for your own purposes, they're just fine, because hey, you're building the "ultimate blogging platform of the world".  

    Now I remember why I stopped coming here.

    "They know you called the Gay Teen Bondage Chatline for 15 minutes last Tuesday, but what you discussed is anyone's guess." - Jon Stewart

    by CommiePinkoScum on Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 05:22:24 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site