5 ms·
I'm not familiar with Conde Nast's publications. Do they traditionally avoid political issue ads? If so I don't see any good reason why Reddit would be an excep
by jsz0 16y ago
I'm not familiar with Conde Nast's publications. Do they traditionally avoid political issue ads? If so I don't see any good reason why Reddit would be an exception. It sounds like they want to avoid the issue entirely and won't run anti Prob 19 ads either. I don't think that's unreasonable. I also have to question the value of any pro Prob 19 group spending money to advertise on Reddit. They'd be better off targeting the mainstream voter.
- lreeves 16y agoThere's actually quite a few ads on Reddit that I've seen about "Avoiding the Obama Homesexual Agenda" (not to mention Scientology), so it seems more like Conde Nast is protecting their specific interests. Or at least, not allowing ads that oppose their views.
- smallblacksun 16y agoNo, they are avoiding ads that they think will cost them money.
- mrkurt 16y agoTo be fair, those are all served by Google, they're not direct sales (like the Prop 19 ones seemed to be). We (not reddit) spent lots of time blocking Scientology and other moronic adwords ads back when we were running adsense. They sprout up like weeds.
- tomjen3 16y agoCondo is a company that exist for one single reason - to make as much money as possible for their share holders. That is their legal requirment, so if they don't do that and leave money on the table they open the self up to liability from their share holders.
- tullius 16y agoThey are a private company owned by the Newhouse family. They can do what they want.
- staunch 16y agoPublic or not the officers still have a fiduciary responsibility to those shareholders. Not that there's any concrete way to argue that this issue has anything to do with fiduciary responsibility.
- maw 16y agoThe ones I'm familiar with are the New Yorker (respectable, and I was a subscriber when I lived in the US) and Wired (not so much, and no effin way), but I have a hard time imagining typical readers of either getting bent out of shape by marijuana use. (I mean, the New Yorker isn't the Atlantic!) Less sure about their other rags, though.
- tptacek 16y agoThe Atlantic is pretty liberal too, and to whatever extent it isn't, it's libertarian.
- tptacek 16y agoConde Nast publishes The New Yorker and Vanity Fair, both of which are associated with "northeastern liberalism". The Prop 19 thing isn't an issue because it clashes with their portfolio; it doesn't.
- riffic 16y agoI wouldn't be so quick to assume that. there is a deep entrenchment in the establishment to oppose hemp, for purely economic reasons. the war on <s>drugs</s> cannabis is way too profitable for the so-called "northeastern liberalismists" to turn away from it.
- tptacek 16y agoUh, what?
- riffic 16y agoI don't know, do you have any objections or are you trying to appeal to ridicule?
- tptacek 16y agoI literally don't know what you're talking about. A conspiracy to suppress hemp?
- riffic 16y agoYes. I'm not surprised, to be honest. There is so much propoganda on this subject that most people are completely unaware of this plant's historical significance. I apologize about the appeal to ridicule statement, your initial reply was unclear as to what you were implying. I'll link some wikipedia articles to point you in the general direction, but do your own research. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conspiracy_theories#Drug_legalization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conspiracy_theories#Dru... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuPont#Hemp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuPont#Hemp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp_for_Victory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp_for_Victory
- riffic 16y agotoo late, they've already ran anti-prop 19 ads: http://www.reddit.com/r/prop19/duplicates/cx665/no_on_19_ad_on_reddit/ http://www.reddit.com/r/prop19/duplicates/cx665/no_on_19_ad_...