4 ms·
To those that think these look spammy - this is exactly the fucking problem. They are not spammy. It's just that spammy ads have been objectifying women on th
by binarymax 13y ago
To those that think these look spammy - this is exactly the fucking problem. They are not spammy. It's just that spammy ads have been objectifying women on the Internet since, oh, forever...and now it's an improper association. I hope this gets sorted out real soon.
- noddingham 13y ago>ads have been objectifying women in all kinds of media, before the Internet, since forever.
- jlgreco 13y agoThose ads definitely look spammy, and I am sure the versions with men on them look spammy as well. They would look spammy with the pictures sliced off entirely. The specific objection to the women's pictures is troubling of course. Hard to move my opinion of LinkedIn any lower than it is already though... Sleezebags being sleezebags... more at eleven.
- SilasX 13y agoOkay, but that's like complaining that spammers have made it so you can't say V1@gr@ in subject lines. In both cases, sure, its an inconvenience ... but what the hell were you trying to do with such an improbable string/picture in the first place? (Trust me the engineers in the picture were not chosen at random!)
- rhizome 13y agoOf course they're spammy: crappy hype words, generic pretty-girl image. Complete fluff in a simple-minded attempt to garner clicks. I don't see how this is deniable.
- gus_massa 13y agoThe person in the first photo was an actress. Now they removed it. The person in the second photo is a web developer/designer without an engineer or major university degree, not sure if we should call her an engineer. At least it's a real profile and she works in the area, so it's a borderline case. If these are the best examples they have, I'd really like to see the other not-spammy examples.