"Ireland Keep Your Taxes Low: Vote "NO" " Ad

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

Didn't get a screenshot of it, has anyone else seen this banner ad?

It flashes between "Ireland keep your taxes low: Vote "NO"" and then says something about a Freemount Company (or something like that).

Seems a bit dodgy tbh with the Lisbon thing coming up. I think it isn't meant to be a political advertisement (which are against boards.ie policy), but still it could be confused as being one.

Made me go a bit 'hmmm'. No one else? Just me? Okay, i'll get my coat...

tSubh Dearg

I spotted this briefly the other day and thought I had imagined it as I haven't seen it since. I only saw the Vote No bit as I changed pages and thought it was really odd that boards was suddenly running political ads.

But you say it's actually an ad for something else?

Ruu_Old

It comes up on the index page every once in a while.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

My problem with this was that when I saw it I wasn't sure if it was an ad or a boards.ie in-house contribution.

tSubh Dearg

Personally I'd take that as a political ad. I really don't see how it could be taken otherwise.

Are they saying, "vote no to other accountants"? That's the only non-political stance I can see, and even then it's very muddy.

Cantab.

Adblock plug-in for Firefox is your friend

Sully

Wondered about this myself.. I always thought it was Boards policy not get politicaly invovled? Some could say that banner is incorrect in some of what it says.

Fajitas!

Cantab. wrote: »

Adblock plug-in for Firefox is your friend

For the sake of whatever 0.00 of a cent boards gets from each Ad, I'd rather keep them there

It does look political, and seems not to have relevance to the advert.

Sherifu

I noticed it a few days ago. I did think it was a bit strange.

watna

Sherifu wrote: »

I noticed it a few days ago. I did think it was a bit strange.

Me too. Wasn't quite sure what was going on. Tis a bit weird.

Then I disabled banned ads which is awesome!

Agent Smith

when you click it, it brings up a Page of lies about the Lisbon Treaty.

Vexorg

Boards.ie has no position about advertising politics.

If someone want to put up a yes banner we will accept it also.

We would be making a statement if we did not accept the banner.

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

i was thinking more of these posts by DeVore: http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=54669211&highlight=political+advertising#post54669211

But maybe he was talking about free ads. Got the gist that he didn't want political ads, but i must be wrong.

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

it's also worth noting that there is nothing in the Treaty that would raise taxes.

would boards.ie accept an anti-abortion ad showing pictures of dead fetuses?

would it advertise places in the UK where people could go to get an abortion?

would it accept a far-right ad asking for all immigrants to be deported?

what is the line?

Winters

I think the fact that a Yes vote would not raise any taxes (Which can be proven by many of the folks over at Politics/EU forums and really is clearly evident from just reading up on the Treaty) would imply that the advertisement is both misleading and ill-informed ... which would be grounds enough for removal I would assume.

Or can I post a advert in there with "Vote No and Winters will touch your naughty bits" ?

Sherifu

Summer Glau wrote: »

That Winters guy is a pervert.

You got that right. He told me it's what all the boys were doing.

Winters

Sherifu wrote: »

You got that right. He told me it's what all the boys were doing.

Did you sleep with him too?

Sherifu

Summer Glau wrote: »

Did you sleep with him too?

;_;

Vexorg

i was thinking more of these posts by DeVore: http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthrea...g#post54669211

They were free ads and linked to a thread here on boards.ie, the issue being that as we gave free advertising drawing attention to the thread, that it might be misinterpreted as Boards.ie had a position in favour of the discussion

Regarding the what ifs, I really dont know - you could ask would be accept advertising from Shell - someone will be offended by the Corrib Gas line, from Nestle who promote powered milk in 3rd world countries, from banks who do not have an ultra ethical investment policy - where do you draw the line.

In this instance I do not see us as being any different to the Dublin Corporation lamp posts.

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

Vexorg wrote: »

In this instance I do not see us as being any different to the Dublin Corporation lamp posts.

I like that line for the next advertising campaign by boards.ie:

"boards.ie: your online lamp post"

Bob the Builder

I don't see any harm in it really that is the fault of Boards.ie
The irish independent will allow an advertisement for Quinn Insurance or the all new impressive Renault Megane. In turn, the editor will butter his bread and say to his team "Don't write anything about these things unless it's good" (this is an example only).

The fact that Boards.ie Ltd. are allowing us to talk about an advertisement they got paid to host is good, and is one-up on what any newspaper would do.

And yes. Newspapers DO do that.
People criticise the Independent Media Group for not saying anything bad about Fianna Fáíl because the owners have a connection with fianna fail. Same goes for ads - everywhere.

Regarding the advertisement being full of lies. Well go onto the streets of the towns and cities of Ireland and look at the posters; "People died for your freedom - don't throw it away", is just as bad, if not worse than the ads here.

The gun is in the hands of Freemont to publish ads that are truthful if they are going to attach their corporate logo to it. It is the citizens' responsibility to find out for themselves from the Referendum Commission if the statement is true. I personally find it misleading, but by being a regular user of the internet, I've learnt to only take things at face value.

There's only one neutral website, that is guaranteed to be truthful and that is the www.lisbontreaty2008.ie website. The commission is accountable for what they say. The government has nothing to do with the commission only for the fact that it set up the idea and appointed a recruitment agency and inputted funding. Content is edited, then quality checked and then approved before going to print. I don't expect Boards.ie to input the same level of quality checking before allowing ads to go live.

Roundtower2 wrote: »

I like that line for the next advertising campaign by boards.ie:

"boards.ie: your online lamp post"

yourlocal-LAMP-POST.ie
...and then a picture running around with a (lollipop) lamp post
Thats good advertising!

Cabaal

Not a fan of this advert myself

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

Are Freemont Group connected in some way to that Libertas / Declan Ganley crowd?

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

They are a Dutch group. What are doing advertising on boards.ie, they don't even seem to be in business here?

http://www.freemontgroup.com/english.php

Bob the Builder

Roundtower2 wrote: »

Are Freemont Group connected in some way to that Libertas / Declan Ganley crowd?

Not sure, but just a FYI, Libertas are financially supported by a group in the USA that sell weapons to the US govt. The Lisbon treaty makes references, in places, to the war in Iraq.

CuLT

Roundtower2 wrote: »

They are a Dutch group. What are doing advertising on boards.ie, they don't even seem to be in business here?

http://www.freemontgroup.com/english.php

Maybe ask them?

Bob the Builder

CuLT wrote: »

Maybe ask them?

But I can't talk dutch?

DeVore

Vex and I chatted about this ad when it first arrived. Our decision was that refusing the ad would be an implicit statement of support for the YES side so we would have to reject their advertising too. This basically unravels all advertising because everyone can raise an objection to something (take for example the people who were annoyed about our seeming support for St Lukes hospital, in the thread linked above!).

Our decision was that we would allow a free market economy and accept what comes, within reason (ie: if someone comes along with an offensive ad with dead foetuses then we will reject it. If you want to get all "ooh but who decides what yadayadayada". We will. There. Easy.).

So, we'll accept advertising from legitimate sources because to do otherwise is an implicit act of support for their opposition.

I fully agree with people raising the issue of specific ads or our general policy as we have nothing to hide and its an interesting issue in itself. I dont think anyone on the Lisbon Treaty forum (or any other forum) seriously thinks that simply because we have accepted this ad, we are somehow in the pockets of the "No" camp and will pay any attention to what people are supporting. I think we have established our "independancy" credentials fairly aggressively by now.

And again someone had to pop their heads in here to make sure we are aware that they are denying us even the 0.3 cent their browser might have garnered us, to no cost to them.

Thanks, thanks a bunch. I cant' write what I really think about you or I would have to ban myself under my own "civility" rules. How ironic.

DeV.

Sherifu

DeVore wrote: »

And again someone had to pop their heads in here to make sure we are aware that they are denying us even the 0.3 cent their browser might have garnered us, to no cost to them.

Thanks, thanks a bunch. I cant' write what I really think about you or I would have to ban myself under my own "civility" rules. How ironic.

DeV.

Just to make Dev feel better;

If you are using adblock plus then just click the arrow beside the abp logo and select "Disable on boards.ie".

Bob the Builder

or of course the fact that of that 0.3 cent, 0.2 cent goes to pay wages, and 0.1 goes to keeping the servers running....

I feel your pain DeV, you need all the clicks you can get to buy furniture for the yacht you bought from the subscribers money over the last few years. So how's that sweet Airbus a320 aircraft going that you have parked in Dublin Airport....

edit:i can't find a picture of it now.... I'll have a look later

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

That's fine so, DeV.

It could be because I dislike so many of the groups that are campaigning for a 'no' group (as opposed to disliking per se the idea of voting no).

Would hate boards to turn into the likes of a US tv station though.

Just imagine Jackie Healy Rae and John o'Donoghue fighting it out in the banner ads in the Kerry sub-forum come the next election.

The science forum with a banner calling for creationism to be taught in schools.

Bob the Builder

I found the photo:

This is what your advertising pays for!
http://www.nevfarrell.com/airbusDA.jpg
Stop this now! Vote Atari Jaguar in the upcoming referendum!

DeVore

No the money goes towards my ever burgeoning hookers bill. This isnt going to blow itself you know!!


Roundtower2, the problem there is that you dont want to see ads from the people you dont like. But then everyone doesnt like someone so no matter who advertises with us, someone has an issue with them. We've been walking that line ever since we put Eircom ads over the IrelandOffline forum. (Initially they were horrified but once it transpired that there was no impact on their discussions and when I explained that Eircom was effectively paying to maintain the area they were using to criticise it, they relaxed and it never arose again as an issue).

Its a lot simpler (and sustainable!) to simply throw the doors wide and make it clear that they get that rectangular space for their money. And nothing else.


To be absolutely honest, by the way, we have never had an approach by an advertiser to remove or modify a single post. We *have* had advertisers NOT advertise with us quoting lack of control over the content over which their ad would appear but if thats their problem, well... Boards isnt really where they should be advertising now is it!

DeV.

Bob the Builder

DeVore wrote: »

No the money goes towards my ever burgeoning hookers bill. This isnt going to blow itself you know!!

So now you're telling us that you're paying for all the hookers, all by yourself? I dooon't believe it!

To be absolutely honest, by the way, we have never had an approach by an advertiser to remove or modify a single post. We *have* had advertisers NOT advertise with us quoting lack of control over the content over which their ad would appear but if thats their problem, well... Boards isnt really where they should be advertising now is it!

I always thought it wasn't about the content, but rather the target audience which you were reaching?

I remember the eircom issue, and it did upset a lot of people, but what people didn't realise that ultimately, eircom were paying money to keep a website running that had users complaining about them. Either way, advertiser reached the target audience and got publicity at the same time.

Every time you discuss an advertisement and/or criticise it, you are publicising it, therefore making the ad's purpose more successful.

Mastercard get more publicity from their banned commercials than they do from their approved commercials, because the ads are more unique and get more publicity.

Agent Smith

Just curious, whats the rates For banner Ads?
If you dont want to say publicly, then if you wish, pm.
if you dont want to say at all, well, ok then

Bob the Builder

Agent Smith wrote: »

Just curious, whats the rates For banner Ads?
If you dont want to say publicly, then if you wish, pm.
if you dont want to say at all, well, ok then

I believe I read somewhere on this thread that the advertising is measured on a PerClick basis, and regarding that ad specifically, it is 0.3cent per user click.

AckwelFoley

I dont trust the no campaign and their motives.

But in the interest in fairness i presume all adverts are accepted, others than ones promoting porn or illegal activity.

DeVore

The rate varies with many things. We've often done hugely knocked down ads for boards regulars who we knew didnt have big budgets. Other times we have charged a premium because they were a big corporates.
We charge per showing of the ads, except for the Google ads which are paid for on a per-click-through basis. Google are the only ones who are big enough to make us accept that....

DeV.

Winters

DeVore wrote: »

No the money goes towards my ever burgeoning hookers bill. This isnt going to blow itself you know!!

Cult is expensive yet worth every penny ^_^


My problem with the ad would not be that it is a No vote but what it states would be misleading to the actual treaty. We arn't going to have sudden secret Brussels stealth taxes thrown out left and right etc. Then again, half the lampposts around seem to have blatant lies on them but they wont get removed for a few weeks yet

5starpool

I agree with RT2 that most of the people/groups advocating a No vote are the type of people that make me want to punch them, so I naturally dislike seeing any ads promoting them. Maybe it is just me, but I don't like the idea of boards advertising something endorsed by the loonies of libertas, shinners, and over the top socialist types. Obviously money is money, but some of the stuff that is coming out of the no campaign is just blatant scaremongering of the worst kind imo.

If there is one thing boards has taught me, it is to dislike shills etc. I know paid shills = advertising, etc etc, but some accountancy firm telling people that taxes will go up unless we vote no is just another form of shilling imo (albeit sanctioned).

zilog_jones

I just saw a Libertas ad here a few minutes ago - I raged.

Simplicity

At least the no camp had the brains to advertise on Boards.

Not seeing any yes stuff?

DeVore

I'm really curious now... Of the people who hate the No ad, what would you do? I'm not having a go, I'm really interested.

Would you really advocate denying the No vote ad and allowing a Yes vote ad? Dont you think that that is quite seriously dangerous in a "public" place like this?

I dislike many of the people behind the No vote, and frankly they are the biggest argument for voting Yes in my book but I wouldnt deny them the same opportunities as the other side!

I would love to see a day when Jackie Healy Rae (grrrrrrrrrr!) and some other political muppet were going at each other over the Kerry forum.... I think the next 5 years are going to see the dam break and boards will be accepted as valid, indeed required venue for canvassing. Which means we can engage with them in threads and they will have to answer....

DeV.

Sparks

I would love to see a day when Jackie Healy Rae (grrrrrrrrrr!) and some other political muppet were going at each other over the Kerry forum

Speaking as a Kerryman, please please please don't ever let that happen. My mind can only take so much stress before it tries to leave through my ears...

Mr.Nice Guy

I think it was more dodgy for Mary Coughlan to be interviewed on Saturday Night with Miriam, not to mention the constant RTE interviews with Cowen and co begging for a Yes vote to please the EU overlords.

Good on Boards.ie I say.

Winters

DeVore wrote: »

I'm really curious now... Of the people who hate the No ad, what would you do? I'm not having a go, I'm really interested.

Would you really advocate denying the No vote ad and allowing a Yes vote ad? Dont you think that that is quite seriously dangerous in a "public" place like this?

I myself have no problem with either side having adverts on the site, more money for boards

What I would have a problem with is the ad being misleading/incorrect, this would go for both the No and Yes sides to the Lisbon treaty and would apply to other advertisements too.

MadsL

Dont mind the No ad per se....just have a big problem with 'Lies-bertas'

(refuel your rendition flight, Sir?)

eVeNtInE

This post has been deleted.

Bob the Builder

Don't mind ads from either side being on Boards.ie.
If Boards.ie Ltd was to deny a YES ad, and accept a NO ad, or vice versa, then Boards.ie would immediatley be supporting the opposite side, which I don't think is a good thing.

Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour, and the P-Diddly's all have their own mediums for voting(eg. tv, newspapers), thats grand. The NO side have paid for an ad here, so why should the admins stop them?

Out of interest, what the fúck does Jackie Healy Rae have a seat in the Dáil for, he talks shíte and is nothing but a piss take out of irish politics. If I saw him posting on a forum here, I would either pull my eyeballs out, or die on the floor laughing that he knows how to use a computer. How would you verify who each person is though?

I could see them moving onto Youtube as well, like the presidential candidates in america did. Also, the old saying "whatever you write on the internet, stays there 4ever!" also applis to Boards.ie. What normal politician would ever write anything on Boards? It would mean they would have to be accountable for their promises, which no politician ever wants. Could you blame them either? It would mean they would actually have to do their job for once, and fulfill their promises.

The woman's job is in the kitchen, but Mary Coughlan's job is out on a farm on the windy hills of Donegal. She's a blow-in in the job she's in now.

Mr.Nice Guy

Summer Glau wrote: »

What I would have a problem with is the ad being misleading/incorrect, this would go for both the No and Yes sides to the Lisbon treaty and would apply to other advertisements too.

So we should ban all ads deemed to be misleading or incorrect? There wouldn't be any ads then.

Not that I'd mind such a world...

DeVore

DeVore wrote: »

Would you really advocate denying the No vote ad and allowing a Yes vote ad? Dont you think that that is quite seriously dangerous in a "public" place like this?

I've no problem with you accepting Ad's from people from the No side.
I do have a problem with ad's that are pumping blatant lies.

See'ing a libertas ad for instance when viewing a thread and posting on the yes side of the debate in the EU is bad form.
Especially when the ad is misleading.
For example threads there have nailed the angle long ago that we lose a commissioner for a 5 yr spell before getting one back (The loss of one was agreed in the Nice treaty).
Yet Libertas are paying Boards to have a lie like that pop up in a forum meant to discusss the issues?
Thats just one of their lies.

I think that you should only be accepting these ad's on the basis that they cannot be misleading.
In other words the ad's should be independently vetted.
Thats regardless of what they are politically promoting.