[Foundation-l] Is a research banner "advertising" of the evil sort?

[David Gerard]

On 9 December 2011 14:58, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't accept your false equivalence between Harvard/Science Po and
> McDonalds, nor do I believe you misunderstood my point: that
> advertising is commonly rejected for its potential for various harms,
> while even those who object to this banner have not rationally
> presented any possible harm that could result.


It increases acceptance of advertising logos at the top of the page.

Getting your logo at the top of a top-5 website? That's *rather* valuable.

Note that this was one of the big objections to the Virgin Unite logo
in the fundraiser five years ago. Logo = advertising, however much
equivocation one applies to the point.


- d.