|
In the next few days we will be trying out
ValueClick Media In-Text format, a new type of advertising that we think
is less intrusive than many other formats. Basically, keywords
on our pages that correspond to an advertiser's product or
service will be double-underlined in blue. Upon scroll-over a
small pop-up window will appear with information about the
product advertised, links to more content, etc. Move your cursor
away from the underlined keyword and the window will disappear.
As with other ads on our pages, we have very little control over
what is advertised. We were assured by the agency
that will be providing the ads that no inappropriate ads are
ever served as part of their network. But, as always, we depend
on your diligence, and if you see something that seems untoward
please
let us know.
On the other hand, please keep in mind that it is advertisements
that make this site possible. We know nobody
likes ads, and some formats (especially the pop-ups and the
pop-unders) are particularly obnoxious; we know how frustrating
it is to have to run a gauntlet of ads in order to get to a
page. Yet it is advertising that continues to be our
principal source of revenue.
Like with other media, allowing the purchase of an ad on any of
our sites does not imply endorsement of whatever product is
being advertised, or the company doing the advertising.
Television stations and newspapers and magazines and radio
stations and other media are not assumed to endorse ads they
carry that promote political candidates, alcoholic beverages,
health products, pharmaceuticals, etc. It is reasonable that the
same assumption should apply to online publications. Besides,
unlike established media companies, we have neither the
resources nor the expertise to sell our own ads. We belong to
several online advertising networks which do all the selling,
choosing and servicing of ads on our sites (and they naturally
keep a good chunk of the proceeds). Consequently, we don't
really have much control over what we advertise. We have made a
special point of banning provocative ads as a general category
because they are evidently offensive to many of our readers. But
we cannot ban many other general categories without a drop in
revenues that may force us to make the site accessible by
subscription only.
Some may translate our decisions as showing a willingness to
compromise our principles in the pursuit of profit. Well, the
pursuit of profit is the whole idea behind our free enterprise
system, and it's hard to see how we can be faulted because we
would like our company to remain solvent. However, to make our
situation clearer it is important to lay out our fundamental
conundrum: While we are an independent, for profit company, we
also consider our reviews to be a public service. If we wanted
to just make a nice profit, we would simply make our
reviews accessible only by subscription -- the New York Times,
for instance, which is far larger and more profitable than we
are, does exactly that with archived articles; and the Wall Street Journal
will not allow any access to any of its articles, new or
archived, without a very expensive subscription. Instead, we
opted for creating two websites, one free and supported by ads
and the other ad-free and supported by subscriptions. So, for a
totally ad-free experience, you may consider subscribing to our
mirror site at
premium.kids-in-mind.com.
Since we will
be trying to both maximize our revenues and make ads less
intrusive, we will be attempting to balance two often mutually
exclusive objectives. Please be patient with us.
As always, feel free to send us your
comments and complaints -- as well as any compliments.
Aris T. Christofides - Editor, Critics Inc.
|
