4 ms·

Because at times, the interests of advertisers can conflict with the interests of Wikipedia. And should that happen, Wikipedia's reputation and value becomes se

by mwg66 16y ago

Because at times, the interests of advertisers can conflict with the interests of Wikipedia. And should that happen, Wikipedia's reputation and value becomes seriously undermined. I consider it somewhat analog to BBC being funded through a license fee rather than commercial advertising - aka Sky (BSkyB, owned by Murdoch).

corin_ 16y ago
BBC does show adverts to non-UK viewers online, though. And while I love that there are no adbreaks on BBC TV, I'd have no problem seeing adverts on the website. (I also fully support the license fee, would never want to see that replaced by advert revenue, just supplemented.) The difference is that adverts on TV actually stop you seeing what you want to see, online they don't. What kind of examples are you thinking of where advertisers can conflict with the interests of Wikipedia? For one thing, if they had an actual sales team rather than just getting adverts from Google then they could filter them out. For another, surely most users can understand that showing an advert doesn't mean the service supports whoever is behind it. People don't want X Factor and think "wow, Simon Cowell must really love Dominos pizza" (is that their main advertiser? Can't remember.)
- mwg66 16y ago
  Some non-UK programming do show adverts, yes, but that is for different reasons - largely so that the British license fee isn't being seen to subsidise commercial content for other countries. But conversely, the BBC World Service does not including advertisements. I would think the best examples of a conflicts of interest is where particular articles detail unethical behaviour or any content in the public domain that an advertiser would prefer not to be included or made easily accessible. Obviously, its not to say that it will happen but just that it could. And it is naive at best to think that a separate sales team solves the problems of commercial bias or influence. Wikipedia is the single largest body of freely available knowledge in the history of mankind. It must remain so and the best way to do that is to continue accepting donations. I see no reason to change.

by mwg66 16y ago

corin_ 16y ago

BBC does show adverts to non-UK viewers online, though. And while I love that there are no adbreaks on BBC TV, I'd have no problem seeing adverts on the website. (I also fully support the license fee, would never want to see that replaced by advert revenue, just supplemented.) The difference is that adverts on TV actually stop you seeing what you want to see, online they don't. What kind of examples are you thinking of where advertisers can conflict with the interests of Wikipedia? For one thing, if they had an actual sales team rather than just getting adverts from Google then they could filter them out. For another, surely most users can understand that showing an advert doesn't mean the service supports whoever is behind it. People don't want X Factor and think "wow, Simon Cowell must really love Dominos pizza" (is that their main advertiser? Can't remember.)

mwg66 16y ago
Some non-UK programming do show adverts, yes, but that is for different reasons - largely so that the British license fee isn't being seen to subsidise commercial content for other countries. But conversely, the BBC World Service does not including advertisements. I would think the best examples of a conflicts of interest is where particular articles detail unethical behaviour or any content in the public domain that an advertiser would prefer not to be included or made easily accessible. Obviously, its not to say that it will happen but just that it could. And it is naive at best to think that a separate sales team solves the problems of commercial bias or influence. Wikipedia is the single largest body of freely available knowledge in the history of mankind. It must remain so and the best way to do that is to continue accepting donations. I see no reason to change.