[Foundation-l] LA Times article / Advertising in Wikipedia

[Florence Devouard]

Nathan wrote:
> FYI. The discussion about advertising will never be completely closed,
> expect it to come up again and again. Conservative advertising could easily
> be managed through relatively minimal use of Google ads or another ad
> server, particularly now that we have a professionalizing staff. Involving
> contributors by asking for donations is great - relying on the continued
> generosity of these contributors to put the foundation on a sound footing
> for the long term is irresponsible.
> 
> Nathan

I am not super motivated to discuss any issue
1) when every one knows it is controversial
2) and the discussion starts by calling "irresponsible" and "childish" 
those who are following another path

But I'll be happy to read what others have to say on the topic.

Ant


> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] LA Times article / Advertising in Wikipedia
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> 
> 
> You're assuming that there is some connection between editorial control of
> articles and the allocation of advertising. There isn't. Take Google ads,
> for instance. Even a very conservative use of Google Ads would make
> Wikipedia more than enoug to sustain its finances, and would involve zero
> risk of an apparent endorsement from Wikimedia in my opinion. We wouldn't be
> determining which ads go where, what they say, etc. We're not talking about
> interleaving sponsored results in searches, or allowing paid endorsements of
> specific articles. There is a wide gulf, and this is a complex issue.
> Simplistic approaches and attitudes to this problem, which bears on the
> future of this endeavor, should be avoided.
> 
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> It would be the end of our commercial and content independence. We
>> could not claim to treat subjects without bias (with neutrality) if
>> we're accepting $$$ to promote companies on relevant articles.
>>
>> Even if the ad service (and advertising companies) are treated with
>> independence (ignoring threats by those companies to pull out
>> advertising money for treating a subject in a particular way), how do
>> you think reader impressions will change?
>>
>> Internet advertising is already too imposing and the popularity of
>> anti-advertising tools reflect this. Just because the status quo is to
>> be intrusive with advertising, doesn't mean we should follow suit. The
>> availibility of these tools creates a disparity between those with the
>> technical know-how to remove ads from their browsing, and those who
>> don't.
>>
>> --
>> Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>