NONE: Re: ONLINE-ADS>> Yahoo Pushing Porn
Re: ONLINE-ADS>> Yahoo Pushing Porn
Mark J. Welch, Esq. (markwelch_at_ca-probate.com)
Wed, 22 Oct 1997 15:08:01 -0700
Greg's and Richard's comments about Yahoo accepting adult
advertising made me feel pretty good about the design of an
"affiliate" or "partner" program I am being paid to help design.
I can't yet talk about the specific vendor, so I have to modify
the examples a bit to make my point; let's assume that the
vendor sells books on the internet.
The vendor anticipated that some of the [books] on the
commerce site will involve "mature" content and that there
will be adult sites that wish to participate in the commission-
based advertising program. My advice, immediately, was
to insist that all "mature" content on the commerce site
be rated with each known rating system, and that suitable
warning pages be used before displaying any content that
is likely to be offensive to some persons (e.g. depiction of
nudity other than universally tolerated "tasteful" nudes).
If the commerce site will contain any explicit images (for
example, on a book cover or VHS video package), then
viewing those images would require an adult verification
service.
For "affiliate" sites, the terms of the affiliate program will
expressly require that any sites containing "mature" content
provide appropriate ratings on all such pages, that no
"warning" screen include explicit imagery, and that any
explicit images be locked behind an adult verification
service. I don't want my client associated with sites that
don't behave like good netizens.
I wonder how Amazon.Com, BarnesandNoble.Com, and
other online booksellers deal with this? How about music
vendors? Videos? My assumption is that they simply
don't allow adult sites to participate, and that they won't
display book covers or other materials that are too
explicit. Maybe I'm wrong.
I certainly do NOT advocate that book or video distributors
engage in self-censorship, but only reasonable restraint to
avoid offending customers. In general, even adult bookstores
don't display anything explicit in the store window, and stores
that sell Playboy and Penthouse generally put them on the
top shelf with something blocking the view of the entire cover
(so you have to pull it out to see the cover), to avoid
unintended viewing by persons who don't want to see them
or who should not see them.
I also would NOT encourage vendors to adopt biased systems
for categorizing content: for example, imagery of a same-sex
kiss should not get a different rating than am image of a male-
female kiss, although some rating systems allow a separate
rating for 'homosexual' and 'heterosexual' themes so that
parents and individuals can set their own filters.
I certainly think that Yahoo and other sites that sell advertising
to adult sites should impose the same guidelines I mentioned
above: self-rating for "mature content," a prohibition on any
nudity or explicit imagery on a "warning page," and probably
requiring some kind of adult verification before viewing adult
content. These rules aren't something I want the government
to impose: they are the rules that we as consumers should
enforce by simply refusing to do business with companies
that don't respect the rights of consumers not to be shocked
by unwanted images and messages which are likely to offend.
(Hmm -- by this measure, a lot of political campaign ads
should be screened as well.)
I will also point out that, as noted in a thread here in May,
I refuse to participate in "banner exchange" networks that
allow tasteless banners -- e.g., use of cleavage (in some
cases, nudity) to entice clickthroughs. To relive that
discussion, start at http://o-a.com/archive/1997/May/0036.html
-- Mark J. Welch, Esq. (510) 462-8483 http://www.ca-probate.com/
-- Note: area code will change in April 1998 to (925)
-- Web Site Banner Ads and Web Counters: http://www.markwelch.com/
-- Small Office / Home Office Consumer: http://www.sohoconsumer.com/
