Was this site running pro-CA 8 ads?

ChrisC

ChrisC

Well-known member
I find that highly offensive.

CA 8: The Supreme Court of California granted all individuals - straight, gay, lesbian - the legal right to have a state recognized union the same as marriage.

However, this ski site sees differently:

It ran CA 8 to restrict this right granted by the CA Supreme Court:

If true, I blame Admin....and will reflect his anti-gay stands in all my posts go-forward. All Alta/Snowbird reports will be denoted as Admin is anti-gay rights.

If you want to be homophobic in Utah - fine.

You want to have a 50-state site....get with America. Gays are accepted.
 
Chris, with all due respect, please sit down and read this.

Google AdSense apparently, from what I'm told, placed ads related to California Prop 8 targeted to California readers only. I never saw the ads because I'm not in California. Whichever position the ads took, the opposing side was free to target AdSense placement in opposition, too. We're not able to make a decision regarding these blocking these ads if I don't see them -- Google buries the identification code necessary to block a specific ad run within the ads themselves. Google AdSense does not give us pre-approval rights regarding any ads that it places on our site. If you wish to complain about placement of such advertising, your venom is most appropriately directed at Google -- ironically, a California company.

I'm not going to delve into the political implications of your post, whether or not I agree or disagree with Prop 8, whether I believe or don't believe that it reflects homophobia, etc. You just need to be informed about how any ads may appear on this site and the degree of control we have (or more appropriately, don't have) over what's delivered.

You are free to react as you see fit.
 
I do this stuff (advertising) for a living.

As Admin said...once you sign on for "Adsense" you get what you get. It's content based ad serving.

The advertiser chooses the geographic market...in this case California...and submits a list of keywords. Let's say the keyword in this case was "gay marriage."

If "gay marriage" appears in the content...say a post or an article... the ad will appear.

From an advertising point of view it can be a gamble. If you are selling a product..let's say a Ford Focus...a negative article about the Focus could trigger your ad. Your ad could be next to an article that says your product stinks.
 
Admin":1z21iy80 said:
Chris, with all due respect, please sit down and read this.

Google AdSense apparently, from what I'm told, placed ads related to California Prop 8 targeted to California readers only. I never saw the ads because I'm not in California. Whichever position the ads took, the opposing side was free to target AdSense placement in opposition, too. We're not able to make a decision regarding these blocking these ads if I don't see them -- Google buries the identification code necessary to block a specific ad run within the ads themselves. Google AdSense does not give us pre-approval rights regarding any ads that it places on our site. If you wish to complain about placement of such advertising, your venom is most appropriately directed at Google -- ironically, a California company.

I'm not going to delve into the political implications of your post, whether or not I agree or disagree with Prop 8, whether I believe or don't believe that it reflects homophobia, etc. You just need to be informed about how any ads may appear on this site and the degree of control we have (or more appropriately, don't have) over what's delivered.

You are free to react as you see fit.
Click to expand...

I am very aware of Google AdSense and AdWords. I helped build them. And there are a lot opt out features.

If your users do not like your ads, change.

You explanation does not show a responsibility to your site.

So whatever Google shows - you show? Whatever.

I am sorry Marc, but this is not good business.
 
I see a HGTV trophy home give-away advertisment. I'm offended by the lack of concern for carbon footprint. :dead horse:

:mrgreen: :lol: =P~ :snowball fight:
 
I am very aware of Google AdSense and AdWords. I helped build them. And there are a lot opt out features.
If your users do not like your ads, change.
Click to expand...

Sure, if an ad is offensive to many of your most loyal users, it would make sense to block it. But the Yes on 8 ad (though pervasive to California IP addresses) ONLY RAN FOR ONE DAY. By the time admin would have had time to get enough feedback, both the ad and the election were over. I also note that while I suspected ChrisC might object to the ad on the day it was running, it has taken over 2 months for him to actually notice.

As I noted somewhere else, ages 60+ voted 65-35 Yes and ages 18-39 voted 65-35 No on Proposition 8. A decade from now there is little doubt IMHO how such a vote will turn out. And not only in California. The same proposition in Arizona only passed by 3 points more than in California.
 
I doubt there is any regulation (yet) for the internet side of things, but I know that traditional media (TV, radio, newspaper) is required by law to sell space/time at equal pricing to any and all political groups...

I can't imagine a specialty web site being accepting of ads that are blatantly against themselves for example, so I'm not sure how you'd easily or fairly regulate that on the web. Still though, I'm sure there will be attempts made to prohibit removal of political ads at some point on at least some segment(s) of the web.

Generically speaking, last I knew either side to any issue could/should be allowed to speak out. ChrisC can hate the message but should proverbially be willing to die for the other sides right to free speech and open discourse in this democracy.
 
It might have been a bit less melodramatic if ChrisC had simply sent Admin a PM asking for clarification instead of a public call out.
 
While I'm at it... I'm as against Prop 8 as anyone, but to think that Admin is, even indirectly, trying to push the red-state culture war on the rest of us via this website... give me a break. And then issuing threats to bollox up his TRs? Someone OD'd on his drama queen pills this weekend.
 
jamesdeluxe":px8bfe4e said:
While I'm at it... I'm as against Prop 8 as anyone, but to think that Admin is, even indirectly, trying to push the red-state culture war on the rest of us via this website... give me a break. And then issuing threats to bollox up his TRs? Someone OD'd on his drama queen pills this weekend.
Click to expand...

Although I'm don't think it's necessary to use the vitriolic language that James did in this post, I do, however, agree with his sentiment.
 
Chris...sounds like I could learn a lot from you about Google products. In every new biz pitch I'm in the more I know about Google products, the more successful I am.

ChrisC":2ly3vydg said:
I am sorry Marc, but this is not good business.
Click to expand...

I shouldn't speak for Admin, but I will. :roll:

I'm guessing that FTO is a labor of love and not driven by a profit motive.
 
Generically speaking, last I knew either side to any issue could/should be allowed to speak out. ChrisC can hate the message but should proverbially be willing to die for the other sides right to free speech and open discourse in this democracy.
Click to expand...

I just do not think ski sites should really be running poltical ads with a bias. And I just do not check this site - nor specifically every forum on this site. So yeah I'm late - and I've spent more time in CO/FL/WashDC this year - but that does affect what I think.

Free speech? Sure. But I rather things be on subject. Like skiing.

Public Call Out? Yes. I do not belive in regulation. Self regulation. And so if I do not like something - I say so. And I would rather have a debate - even if you think I am a pain in the ass. And while uncomfortable, it improves things.

Why important? I give some pretty good information on this site.

And if anyone wants to get 'What Would Jesus Do'? My thougths on the Bible - people died in 0 AD from lots of things. So you needed pro-creation and good diet getting them to the next generation. There are a lot of religious things that are no longer relevant. We can eat certain meats, take birth control/wear condoms to have 2.2 kids and let gay/lesbain individuals exist with state rights everyone else does. This is coming from a Catholic altar boy/Eagle Scout. But religion 2.0 is very lucrative $$, so I do not want to mess too much with people's/Church finances.

To reiterate, I think a ski site should be on topic - not running political Ads. And I there are some pretty nifty features in Google AdSense versions where Admin does not have to do that. But he can run anti-gay ads if he pleases. And I am here to let him know that is not appropriate.
 
I, I, I, I... lots of I's in that post. That's a pretty big sense of entitlement for someone posting on a private website. As Paulie Walnuts so eloquently put it on The Sopranos, "YOU'RE ENTITLED TO SH!T!!!"

It's tough to argue with anything you've said about Prop 8 or the larger issue of political ads on a ski site. My point is that maybe you should have given Admin -- who's been, as far as any of us can see, evenhanded to a fault in running FTO -- the benefit of the doubt and allowed him to address your issue offline. If you didn't get any satisfaction, THEN turn into a pain in the ass and let him have it publicly.
 
ChrisC":9ipeo1ov said:
[ And if anyone wants to get 'What Would Jesus Do'? My thougths on the Bible - people died in 0 AD from lots of things. So you needed pro-creation and good diet getting them to the next generation. There are a lot of religious things that are no longer relevant. We can eat certain meats, take birth control/wear condoms to have 2.2 kids and let gay/lesbain individuals exist with state rights everyone else does. This is coming from a Catholic altar boy/Eagle Scout. But religion 2.0 is very lucrative $$, so I do not want to mess too much with people's/Church finances
Click to expand...


1) it's funny how those who preach tolerance and claim to be the most tolerant , are in fact the least tolerant when it's their views that are being challenged or questioned in any way....2) your twisted view of catholicism is predictable for sure. your arrogance of assuming everyone agrees with you is just astounding... you get all hot and bothered about the idea of the lack of respect for the issue that you bring up, and yet, have no problem slandering and attacking the catholic faith and what it's members believe. 3) the guy who runs this site has never, as far as i can recall, even hinted at the slightest bit of political bias or viewpoint....4) would you object to an ad that promotes the idea that the issue of global warming urgently needs to be addressed and addressed now because of how serious the consequences are going to be if we don't....yeah, i didn't so , you hypocrite :roll:
 
EMSC":3ucnpql7 said:
Generically speaking, last I knew either side to any issue could/should be allowed to speak out. ChrisC can hate the message but should proverbially be willing to die for the other sides right to free speech and open discourse in this democracy.
Click to expand...

that is exactly why he is a hypocrite
 
I just do not think ski sites should really be running political ads with a bias.
Click to expand...
I do not think admin chose the "bias" of the political ads that ran on FTO. He was unaware the Yes on 8 ad was running until I brought it to his attention, because it only ran on California IP addresses.

I don't personally mind that ChrisC brought up the issue, because it is of some interest for us to understand how AdSense works. We all know that admin puts a lot of time in on FTO, and that his per hour earnings from it are exceedingly modest. So I suspect he's allowing AdSense to be fairly wide-open in what ads are permitted in order to maximize revenue. Perhaps only restricting
abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented
Click to expand...
ads.

While ChrisC undoubtedly considers Prop 8 to be "hateful," the subject of gay marriage is, at the moment, a somewhat closely split political issue. Both Obama and McCain, for example, favor a long list of civil rights for gays and lesbians but are not yet willing to endorse marriage. I would guess that admin would need to filter AdSense to prohibit ALL political ads or NONE. We would not want him to filter political ads selectively; then he could be rightly accused of introducing bias. Given his modest income from FTO, admin presumably allowed any paid political ad to appear. So perhaps ChrisC should complain to the No on 8 campaign for not running enough AdSense advertising compared to their opponents.

Why important? I give some pretty good information on this site.
Click to expand...
This is true. ChrisC is still the one far ahead of me in ski area count and I find his ski insights valuable. Admin is proud of the high signal-to-noise ratio on FTO. One of the reasons that is so is that most of us respect free speech and engage in healthy debate without launching personal attacks or becoming so offended that we take our marbles and go home.

EMSC pretty much nailed it as far as I'm concerned:
EMSC":cnmwvr32 said:
Generically speaking, last I knew either side to any issue could/should be allowed to speak out. ChrisC can hate the message but should proverbially be willing to die for the other sides right to free speech and open discourse in this democracy.
Click to expand...
 
Tony Crocker":1h6cmz2e said:
I don't personally mind that ChrisC brought up the issue, because it is of some interest for us to understand how AdSense works. We all know that admin puts a lot of time in on FTO, and that his per hour earnings from it are exceedingly modest. So I suspect he's allowing AdSense to be fairly wide-open in what ads are permitted in order to maximize revenue. Perhaps only restricting
abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented
Click to expand...
ads.
Click to expand...

1. Despite one poster's seemingly informed comment on the subject, there is no way to pre-filter contextual ads in AdSense, save for what is referred to as a "competitive ad filter" in which you list domains for which you don't want ads to be placed. In other words, if I didn't want to run ads for the Salt Lake Tribune I would have to list sltrib.com in advance in the competitive ad filter. Clearly, anticipating every single website for which I don't want ads to appear on FTO is not practical, or even possible.

If a buyer through AdSense places an ad run specifically on FTO, rather than using Google's context engine to place it on relevant web pages, a publisher has the right to decline that site buy. There is no other way to pre-screen AdSense ads.

2. I had dinner Friday night with an ad supplier who was in town for Outdoor Retailer, and we got together to discuss business. He is politically very liberal (he comes from a Scandinavian country). His girlfriend is even more so -- by his own admission, she will actually go out in a parking lot at night and remove conservative bumper stickers from cars. :lol: I started to tell him about all of the brouhaha this subject had created. He then leaned over the table and said, "We ran those ads." I almost busted a stitch laughing. Apparently the Hearst Company made the purchase for one day. By the time he realized it the ads had already run their course. It wasn't AdSense after all.

3. I possess strong political views. I've done my best, however, to restrict my commentary on FTO and the way I run things here to the politics of skiing.
 
I couldn't tell you what Adsense ads appear on my blog. I only see the ones that appear when I log on. When I was recently in LA, I saw a bunch of ads for parking garages in LA that I had never seen before. I can hear James chuckling now...that was Adsense picking up on my rants about parking fees at Gore.

My guess is that Admin didn't know the ad was running.

So the ads appearance means nothing really other than that.

Chris - I vote you keep posting and let this one slide. How's the skiing been?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top