Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: UK companies, including BBC, Channel 4',banks supermarketspull ads on Google

  1. #1
    Moderator IshbelRobertson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    The other side of the pond
    Posts
    1,563

    UK companies, including BBC, Channel 4',banks supermarketspull ads on Google

    For years, Google/Youtube has refused to censor where paid ads appear, resulting in many ads actually contributing funds to terrorist organisations, neo-nazi groups, anti-semitic groups, homophobic groups, etc. In the case of the BBC, the funding comes via our License fees.

    Now a raft of companies here have pulled ads until Google ACTUALLY address this issue. That's the only way to do it, hit their profits!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39325916

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,102
    Impressive!

  3. #3
    Moderator IshbelRobertson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    The other side of the pond
    Posts
    1,563
    Their arrogance knew no bounds. Sanctions might.

  4. #4
    Senior Member catherine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Central Jersey
    Posts
    6,268
    Quote Originally Posted by IshbelRobertson View Post
    Their arrogance knew no bounds. Sanctions might.
    Absolutely. Good for them. Profit should not be the sole arbiter.
    "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
    www.silententry.wordpress.com

  5. #5
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    5,925
    Quote Originally Posted by catherine View Post
    Absolutely. Good for them. Profit should not be the sole arbiter.
    My understanding is that many social media sites shy away from doing much in the way of editing/content control because they wished to maintain their common-carrier protection under the Communications Decency Act from responsibility for 3rd-party-generated content. Too much editorial control and they might be reckoned "publishers".

  6. #6
    Senior Member catherine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Central Jersey
    Posts
    6,268
    Quote Originally Posted by bae View Post
    My understanding is that many social media sites shy away from doing much in the way of editing/content control because they wished to maintain their common-carrier protection under the Communications Decency Act from responsibility for 3rd-party-generated content. Too much editorial control and they might be reckoned "publishers".
    Shoot, bae, as usual, you drive me to the very site Ishbel is talking about to figure out what the h*ll you're talking about.
    "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
    www.silententry.wordpress.com

  7. #7
    Moderator IshbelRobertson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    The other side of the pond
    Posts
    1,563
    I still maintain their arrogance trumps morality.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    2,657
    This is always an issue when dealing with multiple companies and trying to deal with laws and such in them. What one calls a terrorist organization, could be a freedom group in another. (think of the two Korea's for example)
    Are these groups something that could be added to a national firewall? Something how things we feel are fine, China filters at the trunk lines coming in.

  9. #9
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    5,925
    Quote Originally Posted by ToomuchStuff View Post
    Are these groups something that could be added to a national firewall? Something how things we feel are fine, China filters at the trunk lines coming in.
    A national firewall... That's such an amazingly horrid idea.

    Years ago, I worked at a company that made the first real proxy cache servers for the Internet. The main design purpose was to make the slower links of the era more efficient - if you requested the NYTimes web site in the morning, when your neighbor requested it several minutes later it was already cached locally in your neighborhood, and the wee pipes leading out to the scary big Internet wouldn't be so clogged by repeated requests for the same information.

    At that time, there were entire countries that ran all their traffic through our devices, because they had very poor connectivity into their nation from the outside world.

    The devices were transparent to the end-users, and could be used to monitor traffic, redirect requests to elsewhere, blacklist sites, replace content, and all sorts of handy features.

    Some of the more repressive governments on earth wanted us to add features that would have allowed them to collect data on individual users, data that in our minds would clearly have been used to select who got to be taken out and shot. So we refused to implement those requests.

    The whole concept of using the technology to significantly change the content people viewed, or to inform on their viewing habits, seemed a poor road to go down to me. Handily, the same proxy technology can be used to sneak around national firewalls and blacklists, and we released some free software versions of the technology that would run on Linux, and there are zillions of copies out there running in the wild...

  10. #10
    Moderator IshbelRobertson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    The other side of the pond
    Posts
    1,563
    Islamist terrorists' rants on the same page as the ad for a British Jewish-owned business is one example. The Beheader-poster is drawing funds from the advertiser via Google. The Head of Google Europe tried to pooh pooh the companies' complaints by saying the sums paid to the Jihadi or KKK apologists (as examples) could be measured in the pence rather than pounds. Outrageous.

    More companies are pulling ads.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •