A question of ethics

[Tom Morris]

Here's a little one to tax you all...

If I am running a sceptical website that debunks paranormal, psychic and supernatural stuff or at least provides links to people and places that do (eg. Randi, Skeptic Magazine, the writing of people like Shermer, Bob Carroll etc.), is it a good idea to allow people touting products and services that fit in to a supernatural / paranormal nature.

On the one hand, it doesn't fit with the mission of the site to advertise such websites. But on the other hand, if they want to pay their money and place such an advert, what's the problem? They wouldn't interfere with the nature of the site. And they would be paying by the click rather than on commission, so I'd get money for sceptics who clicked and bought nothing.

Surely, it also serves as useful for sceptics, who can investigate what people are selling and debunk them. If you were running a site like that, would you allow paranormal/supernatural advertisers to advertise their goods. And if so, where would you draw the line? I'm thinking that if the product is just something like a deck of tarot cards or something equally inoffensive, I wouldn't be too bothered. But if it was a site like this bloody quack, Dr. Day, who advocates replacing cancer treatment with herbs and prayer, I personally wouldn't.

 

[LostAngeles]

I'm leaning towards "No".

The purpose of advertising is to entice people to buy your products. Let's say Psychic Bob wants to advertise his Amazing Numerlogical Tarot Magnetic Quantum Astrology on your site and pays you 5,000 USD to do so for a month. As you would presume that the majority of your visitors would be skeptics, the most they would do is check out the site, snigger, and move on. Thusly, Psychic Bob has thrown a few grand down the toilet.

On one hand, Yay the woo's gonna go out of buisness like this. One the other hand, I don't think Internet advertising works the same as television/radio advertsing and it just smacks of unfairness to me. Back on the other hand, these people aren't really fair when dealing with us and the public at large.

 

[Tom Morris]

I'm more thinking something along the lines of Google AdSense which serves up adverts based on the content of the page. I've tested it out, and a page about homeopathy puts adverts up for a homeopathic college and a page about 'healing' brought up some links about reiki. These advertisers are generally targetting keywords for searches, and can, if they like, edit their adverts so that they don't include websites that include the word "sceptic" (etc.)

My concern is not so much with the advertiser but with the reader - the people who might visit such a site and buy a product like a herbal treatment that could be damaging to their health (by putting another treatment on the backburner for eg.)

 

[BPSCG]

It's a little unclear what kind of ads you're proposing to carry.

If you're running a skeptical site, it would seem to defeat the purpose of the site to take ads from woo-woos, not to mention calling into question your commitment to the mission of the site. It would be like a temperence society accepting ads from distillers, or a church accepting ads from an agnostics organization.

But if you're looking to post ads from sites that support or are related to your site, then why not? And why not accept ads from sites that have no relation to your site's misison (on-line travel booking or auction sites, for example)?

There's nothing wrong with making a profit - in fact, you SHOULD be making a profit, unless you simply love doing it. Because if you're not doing it for love or for money, then why ARE you doing it?

And even if you don't make a profit, why shouldn't you be able to defray some of your costs of running the site?

Profit is NOT a dirty word - something a lot of people seem to need to be reminded of.

 

[chrisberez]

I'm more thinking something along the lines of Google AdSense which serves up adverts based on the content of the page. I've tested it out, and a page about homeopathy puts adverts up for a homeopathic college and a page about 'healing' brought up some links about reiki. These advertisers are generally targetting keywords for searches, and can, if they like, edit their adverts so that they don't include websites that include the word "sceptic" (etc.)

My concern is not so much with the advertiser but with the reader - the people who might visit such a site and buy a product like a herbal treatment that could be damaging to their health (by putting another treatment on the backburner for eg.)

I pretty much agree with this. For your purposes, however, I'd say no. Having such adds on your page might serve to undermine your work. It also might confuse people. If I opened a page and found myself staring at all sorts of woo-woo adverts, I'd figure I'd stumbled onto the wrong site, and promptly leave.

So yeah, I'd also lean towards no on this.

 

[geni]

Most people are used to google adds so they probably don't matter. Any other add probably would.

 

[Tom Morris]

Thanks for your responses. I'm still no closer to deciding. On the one hand, I like the principle of free speech - I don't want to censor materials. But, yes, it is a bit of a contradiction.

I'll probably contact Skeptic Magazine (etc.) to ask them what their policy is.

 

[BPSCG]

Thanks for your responses. I'm still no closer to deciding. On the one hand, I like the principle of free speech - I don't want to censor materials. But, yes, it is a bit of a contradiction.

Okay, I see now what everyone else saw earlier; you're considering taking ads from woo-woos. I still say it's a bad idea.

Don't confuse yourself by getting into the question of whether or not it's a free speech issue. Yes, people have a right to say what they want in a free society. But that doesn't mean that you have an obligation to provide them with a soapbox. Refusing to accept an ad is not censorhip. Censorship is the active repression of speech - not the refusal to support it.

 

[Hand Bent Spoon]

I'd never patronize a site that claimed the skeptic mantle, and then featured adds for dowsing rods and the like.

 

[Jeff Corey]

You could tag those ads with
WARNING!
WOO WOO ADS HERE!
Course you might not get much revenue out of that plan.

 

[Tom Morris]

Thanks. I'll come clean. I'm writing a book and simultaneously building a website to go with it - first as a way of letting me get my thoughts together on woo-woo matters then later as a sort of expanded version of the book. It's currently hosted on the Internet but behind a password protection.

I was slightly worried when the homeopathy page started showing ads (I'm using Google AdSense which automatically matches adverts to the page based on the content - unfortunately it doesn't account for the nature of the page's content) for the Toronoto school of homeopathy and the reiki page started showing ads for people who want to sell reiki materials.

The policy I've developed (mentally at least) will probably be a statement on the site saying that the products for sale from the advertisers are not condoned by the site and that all people visiting the site should investigate carefully any product before purchasing. I will also frequently check the adverts appearing and any which seem to be antithetical to the site's purpose will be removed. Whether or not I remove such adverts depends on what claim is being made and whether there is the possibility of (a) harm and (b) financial expense from the site. For example, if someone has just got a page of opinions about, say, crystal healing being all wonderful, then I'll probably grit my teeth and bear it. But if someone has a page suggesting that crystal healing can cure cancer and that you should forgo the surgery and purchase the services of A. Loony, your local friendly psychic healer, I'll probably remove it. For most of the adverts I've seen so far, they will be removed.

I don't mind taking woo-woo's money, because it'll be invested in keeping the site running and keeping me working on debunking. But I will remove adverts that could cause harm to someone visiting the site or cause harm to the reputation of the site. Plus if I was asked to run an advert that didn't allow me to run the content I want to run, I would refuse.

I'd rather run free adverts for other sceptical websites - JREF, Skeptic.com, Quackwatch et al. - and make no money from them than get paid to run damaging woo-woo adverts. But that's more difficult because of the programming. Thanks, though, that's probably the route I'll take.

Thanks again for the advice... and if anyone wants to advertise on a new sceptical website, gimme a shout.

 

[geni]

I've got a screen shot aruon somewhere of a TAM vidio advert on a homeopathic disscussion board so it cuts both ways.