wrmineo condemned for ShoutWire Article

Which site linked to a sexually explicit website via a photo of to scantily clad young girls in suggestive poses? I'll tell you who, SW. Now I don't think that posting scantily clad girls in relation to suggestions of "sexy" is an appropriate act, however, it is not porn so it can not be "kiddie porn." SW on the other hand had a photo as an ad that showed kiddies in suggestive poses and it linked to a porn site. Now would I have used wrmineo wording, no, I would have simply gone for a less dramatic phrasing and even wrmineo has said that maybe it wasn't the most apt wording, however, it still wasn't a lie, it was simply expressing the ad terms that he felt best described exactly what he saw. He was outraged and extremely offended about the juxtaposition of that ad on a news/webpage commenting site that attracts lots of young people and by the juxtaposition of young girls promoting a porn site. I must say that if I had noticed that ad I would have been equally offended by the ad.

What I don't get is why you have such a blind allegiance to somebody else's website and can't overcome your worship of everything SW long enough to see just how offensive that ad was in so many different ways. This wasn't a minor transgression. That ad and several like it that others showed evidence of SW showing were so far out of line that it isn't even reasonable to claim it was an accident or a not-issue. Are you so blind in your worship of SW that you are not willing to hold its owners accountable for risking destroying the thing you so love out of their own blind lust for ad revenues?

Come on, open your eyes, one doesn't just accidentally pick up an ad provider that shows porn ads. A lot of innocent people could have gotten in a crap load of trouble if those ads or what they referenced ended up on their computers at work, school, etc. It was also a good way to get SW added to content filtering block lists used on school or corporate networks or on parental control software. A lot of SW regulars could have found themselves denied access to SW because of that lapse of judgement.

 

xxoozero and bulshoy - sorry I wasn't able to participate at recess in your playground yesterday. Some people aren't on summer break from Jr. High, have businesses to run, families to care for and .... well, grown-up things to do that I won't bore you with.

I appreciate your apology, very touching ... you're only proving the points so many, not just me, are making about your beloved SW.

Neither of you came here to squash anything. If you think others are gullible enough to believe that the zero was offering an olive branch or that you were trying to mend fences, you're wrong.

I am continuing to publish (most) of your comments at the blog; ones that are a personal attack against anyone but me will not be published. Keep up the visiting and posting - you're doing me no harm, and Google loves traffic to their blogger sites.

You need to learn the difference between apples and oranges. Having pictures, profiles and such of female celebrities is far from pornography. If Jamie Lynn Spears is the best you can attempt to throw back ... well, you're making the case so I needn't - but thanks for the extra back link!

 

Ya, if that is the photo xxoozero is referring to, it is a pretty desperate stretch to compare that to SW's slipup.

A week ago I thought ShoutWire was an interesting place to stop to find what the popular news buzz was. What I have learned is that SW is run by a bunch of ill-mannered clueless children and that its owners have very bad judgment in regards to choosing advertising partners. I really don't think this is the kind of place that I want selecting the news I read.

If ShoutWire wants to compete against the likes of Digg for popularity and traffic its owners and its members need to raise their standards for discourse and accountability.

 

Shoutwire will never compare to Digg.

I guess the best comparison I can come up with is Digg is more like a university/college community, whereas Shoutwire is a public school.

 

Interesting analogy on the comparison Dekker.

This will be the first time that I have to dissent with KLB a bit though ... I think ShoutWire can compete with the likes of Digg, at least in regards to traffic, and without raising their standards - however, once school is back in session ....

 

Go nuts. Play your little game.

Shoutwire will no longer post anything regarding this issue. If you want to continue posting our comments on your blog, go right ahead. Both of your readers should be facinated.

@ Skinny

You Said: "It's people like us who get upset because we understand these things and when a reputable site like SW goes out and not only does something totally off the wall but then has admins who name call, and swear, it just doesn't look really good."

First of all, we don't care what you or other webmasters think. You are not our target market. Our readers don't care about this issue. That's all that matters.

As far as swearing goes, if you want to live in a sheltered world where everything is refined and perfect, that's your perogative. Our readers came to our site because they are tired of pressed and polished news sites. They want something a little more raw, more edgy. We give them what they want.

 

I just dont get the big fight here, if someone found that a publisher was running junk ads on a site, I would be happy to have someone tell me. Not that any of us have time to audit all the ads on our sites.

 

Klb so the girls on the shoutwire ad looked young you still dont know how old they actually where, id bet anything they where over 18. Now on the other hand you have a 36 year old blogging about 15 year old girls, i know which one i think is more sick.

 

Here's a quick lesson since you don't know your dick from a hole in the ground.

Brittney Spears (who's famous) not famous like you claim to be... but really famous is Searched on the World Wide Web, which converts to clicks, which generates money, and in business.... making money is one of the important parts

Now I'm typing this slow, because I know you don't read fast.... try to follow along, Jamie is Brittney's little sister and by proxy she is also searched often.

Now take a second and think about this...
a.) those are not nudes (which means? come on you can do it..... = not porn)
b.) If anyone had kiddie porn pictures of Jamie Spears why would you put them on your website and go to jail instead of selling them to R Kelly?
c.) Wrmineo's Female Celebrity website is no different than any of the magazine publishers out there -

R.J. you are this months Assclown Congratulations!

NeO

 

wow this has got to be the stupidest flame war of all time.

first of all NeO1..who are you??

as our little friend performed google searches on peoples nicks, yours returns..nothing..what a surprise..youre a nobody.(i bet the moron is googling my nick as I write this).

second of all, the AD's on SW were also NOT NUDES

umm as far as I remember the AD's on SW were not nudes as well...

anyway, the Internet is a free worldwide media, information is free to be posted and read. And a bunch of sissies are too immature to handle an AD to some pornographic site?? to cause all this flaming about it, just proves how immature a 36 real old really is, everytime you make a post wrmineo, you reffer to school and education..did you yourself not get it?

do you have the small penis syndrome? .. i think you do.

jeez, man up, big deal there were some ad's on SW, are you jealeous of their traffic that you have to create a SHOCK-value article to lure in unsuspected readers to such a retarted joke of a blog?? Yes you did increase your traffic, but you alse decreased it by just as much..the traffic you got are people wanting to read the idiot blog not because they want to follow your blog. The traffic was all one time visits.

 

I agree with some of this. Essentially, wrmineo used the same kind of advertising (which is successful at drawing in users, by the way) for the blog, as SW used for the porn site. The only difference is that wrmineo used words like "Child Pornography", and SW used pictures of blondes in bikinis. It strikes me as being the same at least in its ability to entice visitors.

Furthermore, 18-year-olds are "legal"; they also look young or childlike because they ARE YOUNG. Some girls in their twenties and thirties can look under age.

I am not defending the porn industry, but what multi-million (or dare I say "billion") dollar company doesn't use a little shock value, or misleading ads to sell their product?

It's the nature of the beast.

 

Out of respect for others, I covered this picture with the properties box, but many saw the penis sticking through the wall in this ad at SW - no nudity?



SW has still not confirmed or denied ownership of baventures.com, even though they are now saying the own SpankWire, it is not merely an affiliated site.

I did not get any traffic - Google and Blogger did.

If it were done for traffic, I would have published it on a website that I own.

 

fine maybe there was nuditiy, you got me.

but who cares, if you dont want your kids to end up on pornographic sites or even ShoutWire, then use 3rd Party software that blocks out the content, or blocks them from going to these sites..it is a vital part of parenting.. but DO NOT CENSOR the internet.

It isnt like you saw an ad on ABC at 4pm where some guys penis was sticking out, you saw an ad on a news website, where people post articles about murder and violence almost everyday, and the first thing you do is bitch about pornographic ads??

why dont you just fess up and admit that youre just jealeous that the guy who had his penis through a wall got more recognition than you, and youve been sticking your penis through a wall for 36 years and still cant get any?..

 

No I didn't "get" you, I merely pointed out the truth which you're choosing to ignore until it's proven to you.

The SW staff has yet to deny that the very ad company that they blame for the ads that were on their site is actually owned by SW ....

 

Please, I thought SW was way more professional then this. I would care what people thing about my site regardless of my target audience.

How can you not care, a reputation on the Internet is very important. Once tarnished (as you can see on this thread) it is very difficult to get back.

Man you would run a horrible business.

Edit: Of course you care about the general public. SW created an editorial to save face with your users.

Skinny1

 

Yea right and this is what that monkey (xxoozero) sent to me in a PM

Quote" http://www.freshdames.com/jamie_spears/index.html

The guy you are backing is the one involved in promoting kiddie porn. Dint you visit that site alot?

BTW, Im far from a kid. I'm more of a man than you or your pedophile boyfriend.

People like you and your friend should be burned at the stake. Guys like you two who get off on looking at pictures of fiteen year olds make me sick. I sincerly hope you never have a daughter, the temptation might prove to be too much for you.
"

Yea you are the man! LOL

Grow up pecker-weed!

Oh P.S. my daughter said you are a retard. =)

Do you have anything constructive or even truthful to say or just more childish rants.

I can't believe shoutwire would let this type of waco child even volunteer there.

If you would quit skipping class to smoke dope or post stupid stuff on ShoutWire you may learn to spell. LOL

God your stupid!

 

Buehler? Anyone?

 

The facts are pretty simple for me, whether you agree with me or not, whether you like SW or not:

ShoutWire has been going down a slippery slope with advertising for many weeks. Another blogger pointed this out 28-Jun when links from ShoutWire were going to an Australian soft porn magazine.

ShoutWire is not an affiliate site of SpankWire, they own it; there's a difference in definition; AOL is not an affiliate of Time - they're the same company.

ShoutWire was displaying pornogarphy ads.

ShoutWire has control over the ads that appear on their site, especially if they own the very site that they claim was a loose-cannon advertiser who placed porn on their site without their knowledge or permission; they will neither confirm nor deny the evidence I presented though.

ShoutWire editors who have been coming to DigitalPoint and other reputable forums since the beginning of the year, only to create havoc, cuss, flame people and this clearly shows the level of professionalism that you can expect from their site and its staff.

This thread has only given them another avenue to show their caliber and as such should simply be closed at the discretion of DP.

Too bad they won't answer the question, allegation if you will - does SW own bazentures.com or not. Or are we merely calling this an "affiliate" too?

 

all of this, coming from a person who hosts his images on

www.isnowlegal.com

if thats not an inuendo, then i dont know what is.

oh and rsharrer..George W. Bush said you are a retard. =)

wow having an imaginary daughter is an all time low.

 

How much traffic does a shoutwire homepage feature get you these days?