I do like the idea of “cigarette type” warnings on all Fossil Fuel industry ads. WARNING: This product produces greenhouse gases that will plunge the planet into a hell’s cape you will not survive #TheClimateTrail
Thank you for your reporting! Have you thought about @-ing the news outlets and the fossil fuel corporations on your new Fossil Fuel Ad Anthology instagram page?
Terrific, important reporting. Of course these ads make a difference. Every candidate for public office constantly hustles $$$ primarily so they can run ads. Must be they’ve determined that ads, sadly, work.
If the media companies claim their readers are not *influenced* by fossil fuel ads, they're caught in a contradiction. Why would fossil fuel companies pay for ads that don't work? The advertising side of the house is surely working to convince fossil fuel companies to spend more money advertising with them, and probably has statistics to prove the ads are effective.
NY Times may not have run a story about fossil fuel ads, but they did run that series about digital privacy and a hand-wringing editorial from a senior editor admitting that NY Times uses Google's and other's ad delivery platforms, the ones being examined by its own journalists.
The "firewall" seems to work in other directions too, e.g. to block influence of their journalism on their fulfillment. On the way to dropping my subscription I had it out with their customer support and they were adamant that I cannot use tor onion network and still manage my subscription, which I insist on to protect my privacy. Too bad, I was influenced in part by their own reporting to insist on this, though moreso by past exposure to the likes of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Free Software Foundation and Shoshana Zuboff's most recent book. I'm uneasy, though. I can say I'd rather support journalists directly, like you or Jason Pramas / BINJ in Boston. On the other hand some stories need resources only the Times has do they not? This is what someone who used to work for google told me, "sorry, but without us you can't have the Times," not exactly in those words but with that meaning.
And related to google ads, etc. if you're looking at online ads whose ads are you looking at? The way these things work now your ads are not my ads. It depends on the 10s of thousands of data points these companies have on each of us and how they differ. Who knows, maybe someday their skynet, I mean, AI will be smart enough to figure out what you're doing and route you away from the ads that you'd want to show us.
I do like the idea of “cigarette type” warnings on all Fossil Fuel industry ads. WARNING: This product produces greenhouse gases that will plunge the planet into a hell’s cape you will not survive #TheClimateTrail
Thank you for your reporting! Have you thought about @-ing the news outlets and the fossil fuel corporations on your new Fossil Fuel Ad Anthology instagram page?
Terrific, important reporting. Of course these ads make a difference. Every candidate for public office constantly hustles $$$ primarily so they can run ads. Must be they’ve determined that ads, sadly, work.
If the media companies claim their readers are not *influenced* by fossil fuel ads, they're caught in a contradiction. Why would fossil fuel companies pay for ads that don't work? The advertising side of the house is surely working to convince fossil fuel companies to spend more money advertising with them, and probably has statistics to prove the ads are effective.
Thank you for your hard and invaluable work! I will be a regular reader and can't wait to see your posts!
NY Times may not have run a story about fossil fuel ads, but they did run that series about digital privacy and a hand-wringing editorial from a senior editor admitting that NY Times uses Google's and other's ad delivery platforms, the ones being examined by its own journalists.
The "firewall" seems to work in other directions too, e.g. to block influence of their journalism on their fulfillment. On the way to dropping my subscription I had it out with their customer support and they were adamant that I cannot use tor onion network and still manage my subscription, which I insist on to protect my privacy. Too bad, I was influenced in part by their own reporting to insist on this, though moreso by past exposure to the likes of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Free Software Foundation and Shoshana Zuboff's most recent book. I'm uneasy, though. I can say I'd rather support journalists directly, like you or Jason Pramas / BINJ in Boston. On the other hand some stories need resources only the Times has do they not? This is what someone who used to work for google told me, "sorry, but without us you can't have the Times," not exactly in those words but with that meaning.
And related to google ads, etc. if you're looking at online ads whose ads are you looking at? The way these things work now your ads are not my ads. It depends on the 10s of thousands of data points these companies have on each of us and how they differ. Who knows, maybe someday their skynet, I mean, AI will be smart enough to figure out what you're doing and route you away from the ads that you'd want to show us.