Re: Unwanted Audio Ads (why not just turn speakers off?)

From: Phil Tanny <phil_at_philtanny.com>
Date: Fri 06 Jul 2001 09:14:06 -0500

MARK WELCH <markwelch_at_markwelch.com>WROTE:

>But the real point of my post wasn't about getting
>fired: it was about who should control what I hear from
>my computer. I think it should be me, not the marketing
>team for Spielberg's latest film.

TO WHICH BRIAN SHEPHERD <shepherd_at_technologyreview.com> REPLIED:

>Why should YOU be in control over
>what you hear when you come to MY site? My site is
>like my house, you're welcome to come visit, but I am
>the host and in control what you see and hear.

Well put Brian!

Mark legally owns his computer. He can therefore
set it up anyway he wishes. Brian legally owns
his web site, same rule applies to him. What's
complicated about this?

Why do we insist on applying moral rules to the
Net that we would see as absurd in other media?

When a TV commerical comes on that I don't like do
I holler at the screen in outrage? Or do I hit
mute, or change the channel, while I sleepily munch
my popcorn?

When I turn the page in a magazine and encounter an
ad I don't like does that experience inspire me to
feel some aggravated moral superiority to the
magazine publisher? Or do I just turn the page
again without even thinking twice about it?

Do I climb my soap box and make an impassioned
speech whenever the radio station I'm listening to
INTERUPTS _MY_ LISTENING EXPERIENCE! with a
commericial message? Or do I just hit the auto
select button without taking my eyes off the road?

It seems we are sophisticated users of these other
older media and we understand that somebody has to
pay for the programming and we're just happy it's
not us. No problem.

All that said, I would agree that when any of us
enter the world of publishing by presenting our
business web site in a global forum we should be
savvy enough to realize that for some of the
public hating the commercials is more entertaining
than the programming itself.

Readers/viewers have every right to experience
their media encounters this way and communicate
that experience to others. After all, it's their
brain, and their mouth, not ours.

I suspect the main difference between older and
newer media is that the older media outlets are
owned and operated by large corporations that are
long beyond any concept of having their feelings
hurt.

Web sites on the other hand are often built and
kept online at significant personal cost by
individual passionate people who take some offense
when readers come to their sites, take everything
that isn't nailed down for free, and then complain
bitterly about the experience.

Perhaps it's fair to say that it's past time
for all of us, readers and publishers, to grow up
a bit in this new medium. People are people and
nothing in life is free. As revolutionary as
the Net may be, there's nothing about it that
will change those basic realities.

Sincerely,
Phil

Phil Tanny, phil_at_philtanny.com
http://subscription-service.com



Received on Fri Jul 06 2001 - 09:14:06 CDT