On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:35 AM, Andre Engels <andreengels(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Thomas Dalton
<thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
We've advertised third party for-profits in
the past with prominent
matched donations notices before (albeit controversially). This isn't
that different.
As you say, that one was controversial and this one isn't that
different. Then it should not surprise you that this one is
controversial too, should it?
IIRC, the most "controversial" part about the Virgin Unite campaign was that
I made a stub on the organization using a Single Purpose Account, mispelling
the name of the organization, and a bunch of people came up with the
conspiracy theory that the short mispelled stub was created by the actual
organization (and that somehow there was something wrong with that). But I
could be misremembering.
What was the Virgin Unite ad like?