Posts Tagged ‘Wayne Porter’

Islamic Violence Video Banned from YouTube

I just read a post by Michelle Malkin titled Banned on Youtube, about how her video, that was a simple slideshow highlighting the victims of Islamic violence over the years, has been rejected by YouTube as being inappropriate in nature. Of course she asked YouTube why it was deemed inappropriate, as there are still many videos about al-Qaeda propaganda, Nazi videos, etc. She has received no response from YouTube, but has been finding other people in the same situation.

It has come to my attention that Jihadis organized a campaign against us to have our videos removed by You Tube. Some people’s accounts have even been terminated. I don’t know exactly how the You Tube suspension system works, but it looks like a video will be removed if it gets a certain number of complaints (which may be accepted without investigation), and an account gets closed when the third video is removed. One of my videos was recently removed for inappropriate content. The video, It’s In The Koran, could be viewed at http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/videos/ItsInTheKoran.php, second screen (alternative video source). This video contains no sexually explicit content and could only be offensive to Muslims who reject any notion of criticism.

She has posted a video on her site to appeal to YouTube.

This reminds me of the articles by Wayne Porter on Steve Rosenbaum and how Google Adwords blocked any war videos he tried to send traffic to, yet many other ads on the same subject without the videos get approved no problem.

The Story in a Nutshell: As the conflict in the middle East heated up Steve Rosenbaum began to search the web for videos shot by real people in and around the conflict. He found plenty of video citizen journalism and to get the word out he created a channel to aggregate the videos and organize them in a central area. Nice- Great idea! Something Google might of thought of doing since their mission is to, and I quote, “Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”

The Catch: What he didn’t bank on was not just having certain ads rejected, but his entire Adwords campaign deleted!

I realize these big websites don’t want anyone offended by content on their sites, but this is real life, and real life isn’t always pretty. Steve was just trying to make a website that listed and referenced all of the conversations on the war, and Michelle is just criticizing jihadis, a group on YouTube they believe targeted their videos.

The starbulletin posted an article called Web videos mock U.S. war deaths in which they say YouTube is listing dozens of videos showing individual American soldiers being killed in Iraq, saying they are pretty much snuff films, and that the videos include music and insurgent slogans.

Some of the videos, including ones of American soldiers purportedly being picked off by snipers or being blown up by improvised explosive devices, have been viewed tens of thousands of times each in the past few months. Some are posted in YouTube’s “news and blogs” category, but others are listed under “entertainment” and even “comedy.”

Their presence on YouTube shows that insurgent propaganda — including genuine footage — already available on more obscure Web sites has seeped in the mainstream of American popular culture, said Eben Kaplan, assistant editor of CFR.org, the Web site of the Council on Foreign Relations, a nonpartisan think tank headquartered in New York.

So, watching Americans soldiers die is okay, even with a disclaimer, but criticism of jihadis is not? So, I think I have it now, jihadis propaganda okay, jihadis criticism is not. Pretty sad YouTube, pretty sad.

1 comment - What do you think?  Posted by Jimmy Daniels - October 5, 2006 at 2:36 pm

Categories: YouTube   Tags: , , ,

FTC Thinking of Exposing Adware Advertisers

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission is thinking of shaming advertisers who user adware to push their products to users,

The FTC would publicly announce and publish the name of a company that advertises using adware that installs itself surreptitiously on consumer PCs or by using spyware, Leibowitz said. He would recommend publicly shaming advertisers to the other FTC commissioners if the adware problem doesn’t decrease, he said.

This sounds like a great idea to me, one that should have probably been started a long time ago, let all the consumers who are buying these products know exactly who is funding all of these programs and popups. Without these advertisers, these programs would not exist, as they would have to actually create some worthwhile software to sell to make money, they could no longer leech it from someone else’s website.

“There are well-intentioned advertisers out there that do not understand where their ads are appearing,” Hughes said. “It is easy to shame those advertisers, but that does not solve the problem.”

The deeper issue, Hughes said, is the way online advertising is handled. Many companies let a third party take care of their advertising and that company may delegate even further, involving many people and companies before an ad gets placed.

This does not matter one bit, if you are going to advertise yourself or your product, then you should want to know where the ad’s are appearing, the merchant is ultimately responsible for their own brand.

Among those who have exposed advertisers is blogger Ben Edelman, a Harvard doctoral student and spyware expert.

AOL has a policy not to advertise using adware. To maintain that policy, the company has to keep close tabs on those companies that handle its advertising, Polonetsky said.

“If you simply rely on a policy that you announce or simply rely on a promise from your partner, you invariably will be burned,” he said. “In today’s networked world you have to do due diligence to ensure your brand does not show up in an offensive location.” Source: News.com

Exactly. Wayne Porter from Revenews.com states,

For a long time myself and many other anti-spyware colleagues have been “shaming” the companies who engage in dubious distribution practices with their ads. But I think it is a good idea. Consumers are slowly but surely catching on and they aren’t happy. As I pointed out at the Summit in San Francisco last year- where are the fan sites lining up to defend these companies? They are, as far as I can see, non-existant. Contrast that with say iPOD owners who advocate their fandom openly and with fervor.

Let’s get to the heart of the problem. Sleazy companies are there to take advantage of DEMAND. If there were no demand they could not exist. Many companies know, or their agencies and brokers know how this so-called sleaze advertising is going on. Cut to the heart of the problem. Put the spotlight on the companies and individuals that fund this activity and let the cards fall where they may. Flowers cannot grow without fertile soil.

A Scarlet Letter is a good first step (I suggest a J for Jerks), but I still feel some up tempo lawsuits from the FTC and private citizens will send an even more clear message that this activity can and will no longer be tolerated. The issue is becoming less grey and more black and white and that’s coming from a guy who specializes in greynets. Could the Crucible be coming?

I have a few other suggestions, but a big red J would work for me too.

Be the first to comment - What do you think?  Posted by Jimmy Daniels - February 14, 2006 at 10:26 am

Categories: Spyware Info   Tags: , , ,

180Solutions Sues Zone Labs

Speaking of big ugly green worms, 180 solutions has filed suit against Zone Labs, for, and I quote,

At the heart of 180solution’s suit is the assertion made by San Francisco-based Zone Labs that 180′s products try to monitor a user’s “mouse movements and keyboard strokes.”

I posted about this on the RealTechNews website and they accused me of sloppy reporting because I was talking about other things they were doing, not wether they are keylogging or not. Well, who cares? Only 180 and everyone they give a paycheck too. I have not looked at the Zone Labs product, but I am assuming when they are listed as high risk, they are automatically removed, and maybe when they aren’t flagged as high risk, they are not automatically removed. Anyone who uses the product want to tell me for sure?

Such a characterization has damaged the reputation of the products, 180solutions contends, prompting one potential business partner to postpone a deal and many of 180solutions’ users to uninstall the software, according to a copy of the suit obtained by CNET News.com.

Damages their reputation, excuse me while I finish laughing…..

Okay, how can anyone damage their reputation? Search for 180solutions and see what comes up on google and any other search engine.

The suit comes as 180solutions attempts to improve its public image and continues to take fire from anti-spyware groups, which characterize many adware products as computer-privacy time bombs.

Now, 180solutions is firing back. In the lawsuit, filed in the Superior Court of King County, Wash., last month, the company claimed that Zone Labs identified both the Zango and 180search Assistant applications, which deliver pop-up ads to users as they perform Web searches, as a “potential threat to the user’s security and/or privacy.”

They are a threat to users, they have to know where the users are going to pop up those ad’s, if they didn’t know what or where, then how would they pop up targetted ad’s?

Just look at some of the recent evidence from some of the esteemed spyware researchers, Spyware Warrior, Sunbelt and Wayne Porter. Read some of the older stuff you can find on google and you’ll see what they were like, so they’re not that much different now, they are just trying to fly under the radar. I don’t know why I am getting myself all worked up about it, I’ll just keep removing them from every pc I come in contact with, and maybe someday, somebody somewhere will finally decide this stuff is illegal and they will go away, until they come up with some other scheme to make money.

Anyway, if you ever see any pop ups on your computer that mention zango, 180solutions, search assistant, etc, then you have their programs installed and they can be removed by all of the free programs, like adaware and spybot, search and destroy.

Be the first to comment - What do you think?  Posted by Jimmy Daniels - December 2, 2005 at 3:55 pm

Categories: Spyware Info   Tags: , , ,