Sunday, February 06, 2011

Advertisers & blog censorship

I had no intention of posting again today, but then I had missed Of secondary boycotts, free speech and… revenue.

I haven't had a chance to properly review the issues. I don't necessarily have the same view as skepticlawyer. For example, advertisers have a commercial right to place ads where they think that they will get the best results. However, the case does show how much blogging is now part of main stream media.

Do have a look at the post and the comment stream. It raises some very interesting issues. To help my own thinking, I would be very interested in your comments.  


Anonymous said...

Jim, I commented on that post - but my main concern was that another high quality source of thought might be silenced or muted through withdrawal of revenue.

If I were forced to consider the throw away idea of secondary boycott, then I would say it was quite dicey - but I am only a layman in those matters, and work on simple business rules - not "The Law".

Which reminds me - it must be sometime soon to contribute to you for the many (many!) hours you must put into your posts, so that I might be forced to consider "stuff I'd only given passing thought to"? I'll check my records, and get back to you, when appropriate, and with thanks.


Jim Belshaw said...

That's very generous, KVD! I agree with your comment on the revenue side. I was very interested in SL's comment on her own financial position.