Are there any ads that Daily Kos shouldn't accept?

I own and operate a publication, and I accept ads from all kinds of companies, many of which do plenty of scummy things. So I have no reason to be holier-than-thou about the ads that Kos runs on his site.

However, in light of the fact that we currently have an ad on the front page from a virulently racist Muslim-basher like Glenn Beck, and in light of the fact that, in the run-up to the recent election, we had a front page ad from Chevron, a company whose greed has resulted not only in the despoiling and polluting of our planet but in the deaths of tens of thousands of people (and let's not forget that the ad was against Prop 87, a California initiative that I would guess was supported by most people on this site), I have a question: What kinds of ads should Daily Kos not accept?

I know that this question has been raised before. And it seems that...

...a common response is something along the lines of, "Well, it's Kos's site, and he should be able to accept any kind of advertising he wants. After all, he's taking money from these nasty people, and none of us right-thinking progressives is going to be convinced by a silly ad. So who cares?"

Fair enough. But if it's OK to accept an ad from Glenn Beck, a man who has no qualms about slandering Muslims on a daily basis, is it OK to accept ads from neo-Nazis (the biggest difference between them and Beck being that they hate Jews and blacks more and he hates Muslims more)? What about advertising from NAMBLA? I mean, sure they're pretty disgusting, but I think it's fair to say that they haven't caused as much harm to the world as has Chevron.

So are there any kinds of ads that Daily Kos shouldn't accept?

•  Run a search

  on Kos' comments about ads

  All your questions will be answered there - honestly !!

  and besides if you do not want to look at the ads - buy the "Lifetime membership" - I think I paid $100 or something like it -- and I do not watch any ads anymore.

  So now that I have solved those problems for you -- anything else I can do??  he he

  by sara seattle on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 11:58:53 PM PDT

  •  Honestly, the ads don't bother me...

    ...I'm intimately familiar with the process of compromising one's principles in order to make a good living, and I would be nothing short of a hypocrite if I were to hold that against Kos.

    Could you point me to the specific comments from Kos that you're referring to?

    by StupidAsshole on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:03:07 AM PDT

    •  To me - the perfect part was

      as Kos explained:

      If you start choosing some ads and not choosing other - that defacto means that you end up endorsing those you keep.

      So by just accepting them all - there is really no preference - or acceptance at all for any of them.

      It is just a transaction that keep DailyKos humming along for all of us.

      (That is of course not the exact wording from Kos - but more or less what I remember him to say.)

      by sara seattle on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:09:13 AM PDT

      •  I think I have to disagree with kos slightly

        yes it is business, yes it is true about editorial. but...
        I wouldn't run ads that:

        1. advocate illegal, immoral action. The obvious one. Hate, killing, exploitation, stealing from people, scam, etc. ...the obvious stuff.

        2. the danger now is not the obvious one, but the less obvious one. eg. would dKos takes ad from company advocating "anti global warming stance?"

        here is a question for dkos: would he

        1. put an add that contain virus? phishing? or other internet scam? even if it is load of money?

        2. Will dkos put ads that directly advocate hardcore wingnut stuff? War, killing people, racial/religious hate, etc...

        3. will dkos put in Republican ad advocating everything AGAINST what dkos community is fighting?

        ... so no, I don't believe he can implement purely what he said on accepting "ANY" advertisement. On the otherhand we also need to address that dailykos has reached a pretty big size and the operation cost money.

        Markos DEFINITELY has to address this, dkos daily operation has reached a number such that he is now not free to refuse this or that. Essentially his editorial independence is influenced by ads albeit very subtly.

        by fugue on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 03:27:30 AM PDT

        •  get real --

          and leave it to Kos - I believe he has done a good job so far.

          Supply and demand will take care of most of your problems

          and the one thing you have to remember - we all have to remember -- this is Kos' site - we are visitors - and as such we have another function than an owner of a site.

          by sara seattle on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:19:11 PM PDT

    •  Well, you could start with

      the official policy statement made recently: Advertising Guidelines.

      by MissLaura on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:09:16 AM PDT

    •  He also said something about a feed.

      You accept ads from company abc.  They in turn determine which ads for how long.  Its an automatic package.  Besides, that ass Glenn Beck helps to motivate people on the board.  Feeling too good about the election?  Think the Dems got the message and your done?  Well, look at Beck's mug, which is glaring at me as I type this.

      by dkmich on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 03:16:57 AM PDT

  •  kinda missed the point, sara

    we all know what kos has said and we are all well aware that a subscription will mean no ads.   we also all know that we can block ads in firefox with a click of the mouse.

    irrelevant to this diary's question though.  

    by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:46:24 AM PDT

    •  my reply would be

      that ANYTHING goes that isn't explicitly visually offensive.

      If NAMBLA or the Ku Klux Klan wants to pay for blogads, let 'em waste their money, and fund our cause.

      by thereisnospoon on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:22:33 AM PDT

      •  that's most people's opinion

        understood.

        it's been stated a thousand times already.

        i disagree.   i realize it's the unpopular opinion here.   if i were in kos's shoes and could fill every spot at the same rate every single day and week and month regardless of who i accepted or rejected.....

        guess what..... i'd still have the same money in my bank, still be giving the same several thousand to candidates, and still be running the same biggest most trafficed site on the enet.

        and i wouldn't be accepting ads celebrating bigots, fear, and the worst of corporations.....

        the other 250,000+ that visit here each day who don't participate in the site.... you think they click through?

        probably most of them are reading here for reasons agreeing with us.

        most = 125,001

        i'll give you 245,000 out of 250,000 on our side.

        i'll give you a 10% click through on the other 5,000

        that's 500/day
        3500/week (the clickthrough count of only those who don't agree with us)

        i'll bet cnn's added viewer rate is much higher than that extreme minimal figure i just proposed.    i bet there are many kossacks who don't pay much attention to glenn beck and hold enough prejudices that his ad brings some in.

        it isn't a win/win money for kos/viewers for glenn beck.   that is in no way a good cost benefit kinda game.

        why advertise bigots when the ads are booked up well in advance?    losing that bigot and that oil corp doesn't mean the revenue is lost.... it means progressive groups get up there sooner giving the same revenue.

        i know the arguments for kos's policy.  i know kos's policy.   i've only read a goddamned gazillion arguments like this before.   but this diary was put forth in a much different manner and deserves better than the knee jerk "KOS HAS SAID IT, THUS IT IS" response.

        kos is full of it imo.   his policy is spineless and his reasoning that he's given is simply a further display OF that spinelessness.  the revenue is not even at issue.   the spine is.   knee jerk away, people.

        no offense, thereisnospoon and elise.... this is more a general response and not directly to either of you at all.   i know it'll raise both of your ires, but i know i'm ranting well beyond what either of you have posted.   just might as well say it all here rather than 50 places in this diary :p

        cheers.

        by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:38:26 AM PDT

        •  i understand your point

          but I think in the end the most compelling argument is the "if i take certain ads off, then the ads left on I de facto support".

          I just don't think that markos should waste his time patrolling what goes on the blogads.

          And I don't think that there are more than maybe 50 dKos readers/lurkers who would be taken in by a Glenn Beck ad or a Chevron ad.  We're a little more savvy than that--that's why we're here.

          by thereisnospoon on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:49:50 AM PDT

          •  well being in the extreme minority opinion here

            i'm gonna have to agree to disagree with the compelling argument thing.  i understand the point.... i completely disagree that it is compelling...quite the opposite given the readership figures.

            And I don't think that there are more than maybe 50 dKos readers/lurkers who would be taken in by a Glenn Beck ad or a Chevron ad.  We're a little more savvy than that--that's why we're here.

            The last diary graphing out the active user/reader stuff said iirc that there are somethin like 8,000 active users here.   Who are the other 250,000-300,000 reading each day?

            Those are the people who my entire argument that i posted above rests within.    

            by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:53:33 AM PDT

•  Do you have rules?

  At your publication, do you not allow Chevron ads, or Glenn Beck ads, or ads of barely clad women promoting computers or cars? What ads do you ban? How do you set the rules?

  by Invisible Paradigm on Mon Nov 27, 2006 at 11:59:47 PM PDT

  •  I haven't turned down an ad yet...

    ...so I'm seriously in no position to criticize Kos for accepting these ads. However, I believe I would turn down ads that appeared likely to alienate a significant portion of my readership. Of course, that's not a matter of principle. It's a matter of common sense.

    by StupidAsshole on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:05:37 AM PDT

    •  actually a better question would be

      Can you turn down any ad you want from anyone you have a problem with ideologically and still be able to sell out every single space of ad you have available at a higher rate than nearly everyone publishing on your level in your medium?

      Kos can.

      just sayin.  the comparison made in the question above (and elsewhere in the comments, i'm sure) is like apples to oranges.

      Kos can accept whatever he wants... but he does so knowing that the space CNN is using would be filled by someone else, most likely more progressive, if they weren't filling it with a complete racist bigot spewing hate speech.   Sure, CNN gets nothing from it.... only a million plus eyeballs a week.   People who think they don't get viewers from dkos ads are naive as hell.   To think that they aren't reaping the rewards from that ad is to assume that only a very tiny percentage of people clicking on the home page are not completely opposed to Glenn Beck.   Most people clicking on the homepage probably don't even fucking KNOW Glenn Beck.

      The "if i turn one down and accept others then i've endorsed one by accepting and opposed others by not accepting" mantra is a spineless way of saying "im' not going to take a stand on anyone who wants to advertise".

      Kos can and will do what he wants.  It doesn't make his answer any less a cop out.

      by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:52:35 AM PDT

      •  Sell out every space?

        Count the ads currently running on the site.

        Sheesh, it wouldn't take a genius to figure out that 3-4 ads currently running aren't "selling out every available space". I have space for 11 on the ad column.

        You have a completely false impression of advertising dynamics.

        by kos on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 08:50:54 AM PDT

        •  Maybe it\'s time to hire an advertising...

          ...salesperson. A site with this much traffic shouldn't have so much empty inventory. Have you thought much about how you're going to develop this site's advertising strategy?

          by StupidAsshole on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 10:52:40 PM PDT

•  Are there any arguments in this debate

  that haven't been covered by one of the multitude of earlier diaries on the topic?

  Are there any reasons to re-visit it?

  by MissLaura on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:04:15 AM PDT

  •  Don't think so!

    Nothing like a bit of searching to find the answers, or at least
    the long, endless threads, before diarying again.

    by begone on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:16:35 AM PDT

  •  Yes! Kos should never

    accept ads for those penis enlargement pumps. Those damn things don't wor... I mean I don't know anything about those...

    by Olds88 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 09:49:57 AM PDT

•  DailyKos is a sole proprietorship

  It isn't a commune, and there's no board of directors, stock, stockholders, etc.

  Do you ask if there are any ads NBC shouldn't accept? Or attempt to discuss what kind of ads Safeway should accept? I hope this doesn't seem too shocking, but it's really not a participant sport. Spectator only.

  You can still yak all you want here....

  by AllisonInSeattle on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:04:45 AM PDT

  •  So your position is that Kos, if he so decided...

    ...would be perfectly within his rights to accept an ad from the KKK or from NAMBLA because, after all, this site "isn't a commune"? I'm not criticizing Kos or you. I'm simply curious as to whether the people who were defending the Chevron and Glenn Beck ads in earlier diaries on this topic have a consistently libertarian attitude on this issue, or if you still feel at least some ownership over the site and therefore feel that you would have the right to criticize Kos for running certain kinds of ads. Do you feel that there's a line that Kos could cross in terms of advertising on this site or does anything go?

    by StupidAsshole on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:15:56 AM PDT

    •  sigh...it's: N.A.M.B.L.A., please /nt

      by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:34:22 AM PDT

      •  Well, it's also the K.K.K.

        ...if you want to get pedantic on me.

        by StupidAsshole on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:37:10 AM PDT

      •  Do you mean the...

        North American Marlon Brando Look Alikes?

        by ortcutt on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:37:22 AM PDT

        •  Yep, the original Godfathers of soul .nt

          by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:41:45 AM PDT

          •  Anita O'Day

            was Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews?
            (Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeum)
            Hell, you learn something new every day around here. That's one reason I love dKos.

            by kestrel9000 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 04:10:45 AM PDT

            •  She's "Jesus" for the next week or so

              please click thru the ad in my sig to learn more about BibleJazz!

              by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 04:20:36 AM PDT

              •  There's

                no link in your sig........

                by kestrel9000 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 04:34:31 AM PDT

                •  Thank G-d /nt

                  by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 04:35:59 AM PDT

                  •  actually, that is kind of offensive

                    I'm taking out the inri part.

                    by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 04:48:11 AM PDT

    •  My position is that Kos has all the rights

      to make the decisions, and has made it clear that's what he will do. So discussion is (futile) (pointless) (substitute term of your choice).

      BTW, I dunno about your handle... and getting respect? Well, your choice, I presume.

      by AllisonInSeattle on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 08:05:53 PM PDT

  •  Along the lines of

    are there any ads NBC shouldn't accept, I will say that there are ads that every network but one refuses, those being Adbusters' Buy Nothing Day ads.  If I recall correctly, only CNN has ever been willing to show a BND ad.  Their argument?  They have the right to accept or reject any ad for any reason at all.

    by nilocjin on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 02:29:55 AM PDT

•  no n/t

  by SFJen on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:07:22 AM PDT

•  What ads ?

  I don't get it !!
  for some reason I don't see these ads  ;)

  by eeff on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:10:13 AM PDT

•  Hey

  if someone is dumb enough to think that a Glenn Beck ad on DKos or Eschaton is a good idea, why not take the sucker's money?

  by collegekid318 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:13:03 AM PDT

•  Markos has an ad policy...

  that's the only policy we need...since it's his site.

  by Elise on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:23:44 AM PDT

  •  So if he started running ads from the KKK...

    ...NAMBLA, the Westboro Baptist Church (i.e. godhatesfags.com), etc., etc., you wouldn't have a problem with that? If not, then fine. But I do rather suspect that many of the people who argue, "It's Kos's site, so he can do what he wants" would have second thoughts, if they were really to think through the implications of their argument. I wouldn't: I'm a First Amendment absolutist. But I suspect that that's a minority position here.

    by StupidAsshole on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:35:52 AM PDT

    •  Let's hope their ad budgets are limited.

      That would be the Mother of All Pie Fights if any of those three showed up here!

      by cosette on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:52:48 AM PDT

    •  I would obviously be uncomfortable

      with that. BUT...those groups have a right to advertise and Kos has the right to take their money if he wants to.

      If I ever found myself uncomfortable with the ads I would simply pay and get a subscription and then I wouldn't ever have to see an ad again. It's that simple.

      by Elise on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 07:39:12 AM PDT

    •  Most media will reject

      ads from hate groups. There is no First Amendment requirement to accept advertising and excluding hate groups seems like a reasonable line to draw.

      Where you draw that line is, of course, subjective. Would Kos accept money from a "pro-life" group or an ad aimed at ending affirmative action? Slippery slope.

      by Olds88 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 09:58:26 AM PDT

  •  stating the obvious, elise. irrevant to the ?

    why do people insist on that being the end of any discussion on this issue?

    of course it won't change anything and none of us have a say in his ad policies.   that automatically means we can't discuss the rationale behind it and the cost/benefit?

    the fact that kos has an ad policy is irrelevant to the question posed here, elise.   markos can do whatever he wants.   that doesn't mean in the least bit we can't discuss whether the policy is effective, proper, or correct in a progressive atmosphere.

    i don't see why people are so quick to step in and slam down the Official Kos Line whenever this topic is brought up.   some of the ads here lately are so blatantly right wing that it boggles the mind.   the fact that he could fill any of those spots with others wiating in line, progressive groups more times than not, begs the question of why he allows those diametrically opposed to our mission to gain viewers from the thousands upon thousands who click here from somewhre else, obvlivious to politics and happen to see an ad and VOILA bam boom new viewer.

    if you think $3000 (or whatever kos is charging for an ad right now for a week) isn't returned to cnn by advertising here.... well i can't say you're wrong.... but i would bet my bottom dollar that you're very wrong.     there are 5-10,000 who actively participate here.   who are those other couple hundred thousand visitors per day to the front page?   they ain't us, elise.  

    by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:59:47 AM PDT

    •  Kos is a 'libertarian', too, don't forget

      For me, the presence of such ads is reminder of that and useful-- in a way.

      by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:12:39 AM PDT

      •  i've already blabbed on too long about this

        i understand that aspect.

        here's my response in full.... it's probably just rambling and incoherent but too tired to go more into something that, in the end, doesn't matter all that much.   i like to argue and i think i have a point... but don't we all...and i don't own this site so my point is moot.... but i tried to make it there.   i'm sure nobody will agree with me but fuck it lol.

        no offense intended .... i know i'm steppin into a shitpile to begin with in even arguing this point as it's as moot as a point gets but whatever lol :p

        peace.

        by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:42:38 AM PDT

        •  I read up top, makes sense

          but since the question is moot and most of the ad diaries seems like blog-war grandstanding type things I try and take it in as a business expirement of semi-Libertarian principles v 'progressive values-based' principles. And add that I'm glad Kos runs a blog and not a public school ;)

          by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:54:36 AM PDT

          •  omg

            And add that I'm glad Kos runs a blog and not a public school ;)

            that's hilarious.   wish i could give you an actual 4 for that lol.

            i understand your point well...that's why i said i was done....cept i responded to thereisnospoon again.

            i know this is a worthless argument in the end.... but i love a good debate and i think the way this diary was presented was worth a bit of good debate as opposed to most of the "KOS YOU SUCK FOR SPONSORING BIG OIL AND RACISTS" diaries that really said not much other than to instigate shit.   this one wasn't accusatory so much at all and asked a good question worthy of debate.

            that's why i put a lil bit into putting forth a dissenting opinion here whereas in the last few i just 4'ed the dissenters lol.

            by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:58:40 AM PDT

            •  to clarify...

              this one wasn't accusatory so much at all and asked a good question worthy of debate and presented it in such a way that debate itself was inspired rather than what the diaries demanding kos take down ads inspired....complete crap and deserved knee jerk responses.

              this diary was not one of those and that's why i responded to like i did.

              by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 02:02:39 AM PDT

            •  Glenn Beck Cafeteria presents Taco Tuesdays

              I think there is a collective element to blog-ads, too, iirc, so the big sites help pull in revenue which also spreads to the smaller sites. If DK had it's own direct ad sales then he could hold spots for progressive groups at the same price. But I suppose picking and choosing now might have some bad effects on rates or on smaller sites. A progressive net-work needs to be built, who knows the absolute right way? Not me.

              by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 02:13:22 AM PDT

              •  eh

                i'd written a (long but saying not what i thought it was saying) response but after reading it over i don't think i presented a very valid argument so im gonna have to think over what you said tomorrow.  i disagreed (shocker) on the top level and disagreed on the bottom level benefit.

                dunno.... you might be right but i'll have to think it over.   not that i have any mind in business but i'll think it over and give my opinion tomorrow..... i rambled on and on and realized i wasn't sayin much.....my brain is much after work tonight and stayin up still (for no apparent reaosn other than i'm used to stayin up this late lol).

                peace :p

                by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 02:29:32 AM PDT

                •  Check James Ellroy, too, he is real right-wing

                  but no one has complained so far...

                  by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 03:02:36 AM PDT

                  •  serial killers?

                    right wing faux-liberatarian gasbag who hates minorities be they black, arab, muslim, buddhist, latino...

                    oil corporation trying to put the wool over people's eyes with a p.r. campaign.....

                    court tv doing a series on serial killers...including james ellroy?

                    lol the jokes on me since i had to go and actually look at the ads to see what you wer etalkin bout

                    wait...that was the joke right? :p

                    by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 03:16:39 AM PDT

                    •  Not to compare to Chevron, there's all kinda sh*t

                      lurking around. Ellroy was a regular Clinton-basher in his column in GQ. And at Wal-Mart they sell "An Inconvenient Truth" along with a power-saving lightbulb in a special gift pack. If I saw a Wal-Mart ad here tho I'd dislike it.

                      by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 03:28:32 AM PDT

                      •  agreed

                        but the comparison is really ridiculous when it comes to the ads here as i showed above.

                        by tlh lib on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 03:35:20 AM PDT

                        •  The casual reader click-thrus as you pointed out

                          is where the 'we're savvy' thing breaks down--but I am mostly thinking about the complaint diaries themselves, they can't be anything but opportunistic in this context. Now, I have been thinking about ads since the diary was posted and also I have read all the ads on here for the first time, including the classifieds and clicked thru to them! I might write a rant diary about Ellroy and The Freedom Toast. That ad has been up for like a year or something. Murder, my fucking toast, Kos!

                          by hhex65 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 03:42:56 AM PDT

    •  I think that talking about specific ads

      would be one thing...but this diary is more about the general ad policy than it is about the Beck ad, and that was my problem with it.

      The title specifically lends itself to that reading. So, when I read the title and then the diary I decided to respond to what I read...which was an argument or a question as to whether there are ads that might not be acceptable. The fact is, there's nothing we can say about that. Markos has an ad policy...that's why I left the comment I did.

      Now, if Kossacks want to write diaries about specific ads as they appear that are or may be problematic or deceptive, I'm cool with that...provided it is done in a way that educates the reader as to the real background of the group/person etc., but doesn't focus entirely on whining about how "AD X is bad for Daily Kos".

      There are PLENTY of ads here that I've had a problem with. I wasn't particularly excited about the Chevron ad, or the ad deceiving people on Net Neutrality, and I don't like the Beck ad. The difference I guess is that I simply don't have time to write diaries about them...and I hope the vast majority of Kossacks are smart enough to realize that those groups/people etc. are actually NOT good.

      I am in NO way against educating Kossacks about the ads...I am against handwringing over the ad policy which I feel Markos has been incredibly clear about. I really like the ad policy actually. I think it's very smart. That doesn't mean I like every ad.

      I guess today I'm saying, don't underestimate people. I have no idea why I'm arguing that since I just graded 3 failing papers in a row...simply because people wouldn't follow directions...but I feel that way most of the time anyway. The right diary, written the right way...could do a lovely job explaining the ads to readers. I encourage people to write them...this one is doing that though.

      by Elise on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 07:49:11 AM PDT

      •  i understand your points

        i disagree to an extent but see where you're coming from.

        this is a bit of a late reply as i'd missed the fact that you'd responded due to this being a couple pages back on my comments..... getting in too many arguments apparently lol.

        but just wanted you to know that i'd read your reply and understand what you're saying regardless of whether i agree or not.

        by tlh lib on Wed Nov 29, 2006 at 11:21:19 PM PDT

•  Just red meat thrown at kool koskids.

  Builds the Beck target audience who get off over all the negative comments here.
  They love it that we hate them.

  by cosette on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:32:58 AM PDT

  •  I think you're actually right...

    ...even though I suspect you're joking. The Glenn Beck ads aren't designed to convince Kossacks to tune into his show. They're simply designed to get us talking about his show, thus increasing the buzz around it.

    by StupidAsshole on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:40:57 AM PDT

    •  And there is no shortage of buzz here.

      No, I wasn't kidding.  
      But I really think that some of us are masochists or have anger management issues (not me, of course...) and like to scream and throw stuff at the TV.
      We are probably some of their most loyal viewers and they don't care about our motivation ...as long as we're watching their show.
      I can't tell you how many times I have sworn off Chris Matthews and then relapsed.  What makes him so dangerous is the intermittant reinforcement schedule that he puts his viewers on.  You just keep watching because you think that Chris has really turned the corner and is a closet liberal and then gaaaaa...

      by cosette on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:49:04 AM PDT

•  More Gilligan's Island (Pie) Ads

  My only complaint about the ads is that there haven't been any pie-throwing, wrestling women or beach volleyball players in a while.  Maybe Chevron could spice up their ads a little.

  by ortcutt on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:33:14 AM PDT

  •  Mmmm...

    ...banana cream...

    Those ads were yummy! :)

    (ducks)

    by HellofaSandwich on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:34:41 AM PDT

  •  Pie ads

    I am a newbie here.  I have heard so much about the Pie ads that I would love to see what they were all about.  They sound hilarious quite frankly.

    by walja on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 03:52:53 AM PDT

•  It's a signal to non-whites

  It says "we'll do business with people that hate you because of the color of yours skin."

  CNN is saying "fuck you if you're not white", and DailyKos and the other high-profile blogs which use BlogAds are saying

  "We're not going to rock the boat. We don't mind getting pushed around by BlogAds.com

  We don't mind Glenn Beck's hateful visage glaring from our progressive blogs and beaming his hatred at our readership."

  by PaulGaskin on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 12:54:09 AM PDT

•  my take

  

  Really, anything goes as long as it's not explicitly offensive material.

  If NAMBLA or the KKK wants to pay for blogads, let 'em.  Waste of their money, and more money for Markos to build dKos 4.0

  by thereisnospoon on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:20:59 AM PDT

  •  With so many new peeps here...

    this discussion is going to come up again and again.
    It's healthy and we shouldn't belittle those that  bring it up and want to chat about it.

    My advice:  ignore the diary and move on.
    

    by cosette on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 01:26:07 AM PDT

    •  But since their user IDs are so high

      they don't matter. At least that's what the troll hunters tell me.

      by ticket punch on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 07:10:49 AM PDT

•  The advertisers

  Kos is right to note that turning down some ads creates a tacit endorsement for others. Should Kos become an implied supporter of certain businesses or causes, that in itself might cause problems.

  While most of our advertisers would be thrilled to be endorsed by the Kos-man, what if more mainstream advertisers want to avoid a perceived support from Liberal Blogofascists?

  Look at Air America radio. ABC/Disney has forbidden its sponsors from advertising there. Do we want to get in a fight over this, a tug of war over who can advertise where? If there is a perceived complicity between Kos and the advertisers, that might also hurt their ability to advertise elsewhere themselves. Businesses don't take nearly as many risks these days -- if advertising here causes them larger problems, some might back out.

  by kath25 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 02:04:03 AM PDT

•  That domain belongs to kos

  it isn't ours.

  This topic has been covered many times.

  The site functions quite well, don't you think?

  Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshall

  by bronte17 on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 03:35:09 AM PDT

•  Really, you would be wise to learn how...

  ...to tune out advertisements.  Does wonders for the psyche.

  by rserven on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 05:15:52 AM PDT

  •  I don\'t hate advertising

    I like free content, therefore I love advertising. Often I don't fast forward through commercials when I'm watching recorded TV. I was just asking if people thought there was any kind of advertising that Daily Kos shouldn't accept.

    by StupidAsshole on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 10:57:18 PM PDT

•  ad jiu jitsu - if you disapprove of an ad , click

  on it, and make them pay!

  by Wee Mama on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 05:26:01 AM PDT

•  As long as the ads don't affect the KOS Content

  They are free to spend money here to give us our forum even though none of us would ever buy into their product.  As long as Kos and Co. don't feel compelled to bow to their wishes.

   You've got to feel there is a sense of despiration for the guy who is at the time slot of Olbermann advertising here.   Could this be a weird joke being played on him by "progressive" elements in his marketing organization?

   When the NYTimes with their cast of Blogger haters is advertising here you have got to think we must have some economic clout, for pajama clothed adolescents living in their parent's basement!

  Bahahahaw!

   

  by Lunch Lady on Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 06:58:48 AM PDT