And this has what to do with Park51, the topic at hand? No one has filed a lawsuit. There is no security decision.

Your comment is a non sequitur.

If you're going to just ignore the definitions of words, what's the point of trying to engage you in conversation?

I can try to explain it simply, but I suspect you will not acknowledge the direct comparison.

[group] gets mad when people assume [thing about the group] based on the actions of a very, very few extreme members of the group when that is not at all true.

[Right-wingers] get mad when people assume [they are as bad as the Taliban] based on the actions of a very, very few extreme members of the group when that is not at all true.

[Muslims] get mad when people assume [they want to violently kill Americans] based on the actions of a very, very few extreme members of the group when that is not at all true.

It is no more complicated than that. Get it?

Man, when /. posts a story on advertising all the whackos come out of the woodwork.

Man - ain't that the truth?

*cough* *cough*

Okay, if your beef is with advertisers in this definition, then I whole heartedly agree. They're only purpose is to come up with shit to sling about their products.

And then, if I understand what you do properly, is take this shit and attempt to get people to look at it. If people look at this shit and click on a link or are properly deceived and buy the product, you get a cut or a monetary reward. Correct?

However, most everyone on this article, and the article itself are decrying the moral values of publishers and media buyers, not advertisers.

If you go back and read the comments with an unbiased eye, you'll see that this is not really true. It's you and
Lord_Dweomer attempting to defend your jobs. Most of the other comments are decrying the moral values of everyone in the industry. Which is as it should be.

Advertisers don't do shit as far as tracking you across websites, thats all the work of media buyers and some sub- offer networks.

And that's not morally reprehensible? Is it not true that they sling the shit as well? If advertising itself is based on lies, then the people pushing the advertising are just as bad, correct?

"I am pretty new to the marketing industry, and yea it really is full of people pulling iffy bulls*** to get the sales" -- CyberWarrior.

So, what? Like 90% is full?

"I am pretty new to the marketing industry, and yea it really is full of people pulling iffy bulls*** to get the sales" -- CyberWarrior.

I have a very busy life and automating recommendations is a powerful tool for me to become aware of new things that I don't otherwise have time to become aware of on my own.

I'm sorry your life sucks so much! :(

It is something I have had cause to consider deeply lately.

A little too deeply, thinks I.

I was actually hoping for more discussion from you and possibly points to the contrary rather than a simple dismissal like this. If you have more to add, I really would enjoy reading it.

I have one point that you simply refuse to address. It's a simple one, yet you're refusing to address it directly. So, ya know, good luck and all that. Hope you decide to quit the advertising marketing game someday and hopefully take a few with you.

Oof the ignorant card! Excuse me while I go shrug that one off.

Ah, much better. Everything relies on your first bullet. My point, which you don't seem to want to acknowledge is that advertisers get paid to promote a product regardless of the quality of that product. That the product may be inferior does not matter. The spin it as best they can. i.e.: they lie for money. I cannot make it any more clear than that. You may throw lots of details about the business at me in an attempt to hide that fact, but the fact remains. I suspect you once knew that, but have made your bed in the business and now cannot see it either because you've chosen not to or you've forgotten that given the crush of details anc complexity you are now obviously a master of.

Holy crap, you've really bought into this whole thing. I wish you the best of luck.

I'm not sure what the context of what you're saying is. If you're picking the ads you're running, are you a "content provider"? What do you do exactly?

WRT to being unethical, I believe that lying for pay is unethical in most cultures. This is what advertising and marketing people do. If you have the official book of ethical behaviour for citizens of capitalist countries, I'd sure love to see it. I was unaware that one existed.

Oh, and if you want to generalize, how about I say that all developers are deceptive, unethical people because there are a handful (comparatively) who write malicious code? Think I'm stupid for making that kind of assumption?

Yes, yes I do.

Well that's what you just did.

No, no it's not. Advertisers and marketers get paid to lie, to push a specific point of view without regard to facts. Developers get paid to write code. These are not the same thing at all. One is being deceptive and unethical for pay. The other is writing code for pay. You say that you do your own design and development. Well then, please, please, please, stop doing marketing and switch to that full time. We'll all be better off.

And I presume your high quality products will be sold on merit alone, every potential customer will find you independently and you will make your business survive purely by word of mouth?

Yes, exactly. Glad to see that you understand my point of view. When I buy something, I either just look at the price or do research on my own. I would *love* it if 99% of the information about a product was not BS/marketing/advertising that I had to wade though to get to the unbiased third-party opinions and facts! Marketing and advertising is a blight on the information landscape.

Not all marketers are deceptive, unethical people...

Yes, yes they are. You get paid to push a point of view. If you get hired by someone else, you push their point of view. That is deceptive and unethical by definition. I don't care how you convince yourself that this is not your job description - but it is. It may be needed in today's world (although I doubt that assertion), but it is not ethical and it is, by it's nature, deceptive. You should accept that fact.