In response to Matt's comment on the "Soundbites" post:
Well, in my defense, I usually do post links rather than full articles. But in this case, the source material definitely warranted its own post (rather than one featuring a jumble of links) in terms of length, interestingness, and scope of appeal. I did actually think twice about it, but more in terms of giving them credit rather than the ad revenue shtuff. I figured a byline was good enough for the following reasons:
a) I voted in 75% of these polls - implying that I am certainly an avid (daily) reader and active participant on their site, and have given them lots of free publicity (regardless of actual size of my often non-existent readership) and "clicks" on this site alone.
b) Sure they compiled these quotes and created the polls, but the real people responsible for any chuckles you may have had were Conan O'Brien, Jon Stewat, David Letterman, etc.
c) By far the majority of Entertainment Weekly's revenues come from their magazine; the website is more of a supplement. That's why you'll find lots of articles free of charge and with really very little ads blocking your view.
d) As James mentioned in his post, there are lots of ways to get around advertising these days. Personally I think the amount of it out there is morally reprehensible and a good reflection of our society.
But in case you are still a little wound-up over this business of paying (in some way, shape, or form) for anything you received benefit from, here's what you missed:
CLICK ME!
CLICK ME!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm just here to ask these questions! No winding up of any sort has occurred.
But quit stealing music, for God's sake!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And P.S.
If only I'd known I could've gotten my degree, online, from the highly-prestigious U of Phoe, I could've saved thousands of dollars on my education! That's so awesome!
Today's Frazz says a lot about the amount, content and effect of advertising that's out there, all in four little panels... no direct link, 'cause it'll be unavailable (or perhaps behind a paywall) in a few weeks anyway, but for future reference it's dated January 5, 2007.
Post a Comment