I built this website. From scratch. Including the servers.
I have already promised my eternal undying love to this Apple HAL - because it gives me goosebumps.
But back when I was a young ad-pup, the Guardian Points of view was the ad that made my heart beat faster.
I think the creative commons is a great idea for everyone who wishes to use it - but I have also seen is abused. I've had to point out the errors of bloggers who have reposted images without asking for permission - which were not under any public domain/CC license. By re-posting the images they had no right to, under the CC license , they made the images available under the CC license. Clearly, not the right thing to do [tm] as only the photographer of said images has the right to change the image license, and it undermines (or sabotages) the effort of the Creative Commons.
I was about to post a response there to a fella named Jake who had posted something like (paraphrasing here) "A small webpublisher can't (won't?) pay $250 for a thumbnail. J is only tryng to work out a way that is fair to everyone..."
I had to change my reply a little, deleteing a few cuss-words, and while I reloaded I saw that Leslie had replied to that, much better than I ever could, explaining in a few words that theft is still theft, and "fair" is to not steal. Then I changed what I was writing again to work better with that, and at yet another reload - I find three comments (the two mentioned included) have been deleted.The comments weren't particularly inflammatory, just the normal misconceptions that I wanted to adress, so I don't know why they were deleted, but I see now that you've already posed that question directly in the comments Leslie.
Somewhat related - This post by Justin Kirby should be a read as well The Hidden (in Plain Sight) Persuaders debate
Jim said: I think Balter called for transparency at Ad:Tech because he knows that without it, marketers will destroy the very thing they are trying to harness. While that rings perfectly true and thus passes Occam's razor without it even being a close shave, my personal razor is a tad warped. I think they'd rather kick up a storm about this transparancy issue and look like they're doing something good than to answer questions about using kids to market to other kids, which their membersmight be doing - who knows? We don't know who the members are as the WOMMA do not disclose who has joined them. That potato is too hot for them to handle, so they picked another one instead, one that people clearly would be talking about as it is of interest. What I find to be the wierdest thing here in all this is that we are having untransparent debate about transparency.
Then again, I might be mad. Y'all know me, what do you think, is it time for the loonybin, or to become a CEO of a marketing company?
There are currently 5 users online.
Adland® is a commercial-laden heaven and hell for advertising addicts around the world.
This advertising publication was founded in 1996, built on beer and bravery, Adland® now boasts the largest super bowl commercials collection in the world.
Adland® survives on your donations alone. You can help us out by buying us a Ko-Fi. Adland® works best in Brave browser
