|PBS to Disclaim Google Ads|
Kinda fascinating to watch this one play out:
|PBS, which has had Google ad links on its home page since January, says it will modify the disclosure page for those linkes to include a specific advisory that clicking on the links is taking the surfer to a different site with different policies. |
The move comes after a complaint to PBS ombudsman Michael Getler from Center For Digital Democracy Executive Director Jeff Chester, who has been critical of PBS over addition of the external links from Google advertisers, as well as PBS' decision to start running banner ads on many of its Web sites.
In his letter, Chester said: "First, such ad links should not appear at all (nor, in my opinion, the ads that are about to become more prominent this Fall). But, at the very least, users should be made aware that they are leaving the PBS site; that this is a paid promotion; and that data may be collected and used."
After all, PBS is the king of public content and public subsidized content via tax dollars. Should they have any relationship to advertisers at all? Let alone having to disclaim them? Fascinating.
It seems strange PBS' website would have sponsored ads by Google on the homepage. I am however happy to hear that sites are actually making Google's sponsored links more apparent.
>> After all, PBS is the king of public content and public subsidized content via tax dollars. Should they have any relationship to advertisers at all?
well, the money has to coem from somewhere. They are under attack from certain groups over the pubic financing so maybe this their way to become less dependent on fed money.
|Should they have any relationship to advertisers at all? Let alone having to disclaim them? |
Public funding of PBS has been on the decline for at least a decade. In our neck of the woods, every show contains something like, "Presentation of this show made possible by grants from the B & M Gates Foundation", or even in some cases specific companies (i.e NOT charitable foundations).
That is advertising
Public broadcasting is ot what it once was. They do a pretty good job of fundraising and remaining "commercial free" given the lack of support, and sometimes overt hostility, that the govt demonstrates towards them.
IMHO, I see nothing wrong with them using AdSense or banners to help support their site and their work. I'm all for something that takes a little burden off the Feds and our taxes.
They cannot make anyone click on an ad, if someone clicks on an ad, they must have been interested in what the ad said, so where's the harm? MOST surfers know how to click the back button should they get to a page they are not interested in.
These people who are whining about the ads, need to cough up some donations so that PBS can operate.
What's the old saying? Gas, a**, or grass, no one rides for free!
"Not for Profit"
"Rather expand Salaries"
I am freelance A/V tech and was on a PBS show in CA a few years ago, those people are not skimping at all.
Did you know that Non-Profits can keep up to 60% of the gathered revenue for operating costs.
bringing undue attention to the ads-grounds for a ban I think
|ad links on its home page since January, says it will modify the disclosure page for those linkes to include a specific advisory that clicking on the links is taking the surfer to a different site with different policies. |
Many premium publishers display a link to a "What is this?" page.
Many large reputable organizations - and I have seen smaller ones too - have links to a "What Is This" page.
The reason is, undoubtedly, to ensure that there is a clear differentiation between content and advertising.
The worst thing for these sites would be to have any confusion between the two. No blending of content and ads on these sites.