1 | Myrna the Minx

February 24th, 2007 at 3:02 pm

As usual, jerz exaggerates and misconstrues. The point was that everyone knows the Clinton campaign has the most money so if they arent even buying ads on non-national blogs, the prospects for ads on local blogs is not looking good. Its not about getting a Clinton ad per se, its about the poor outlook for local blogs in the campaign season ahead.

2 | Ryan Jerz

February 25th, 2007 at 2:23 pm

Did you post twice about it, Myrna? What makes you, me, or anyone worthy of the ads? That was my question. You seem to think you are, but the buyers do not. Stop whining.

3 | bigstarlet

February 26th, 2007 at 7:50 pm

I sense that, in the greater scheme of things, the both of you are working toward the same goal: Greater overall recognition of the Northern Nevada blogosphere in the eyes of the national bloggerati. However, what works for one person will not work for another. To make any kind of broad stroke on what is right and wrong in the local blogosphere is towing a dangerous path, IMHO. I personally don’t like advertising on blogs because I’d like to think that someone’s personal opinion wasn’t brought to me by Pepsi. OTOH, I tend to be snarky more about blog content, rather than what one does with his/her blog, and how one promotes it. If someone wants to put Hilary’s on her blog and charge her for it, then hey! No skin off of my nose.

What scares me about political advertising on blogs, however, is that the very idea someone with a personal digital space can be bought for someone’s campaign can potentially encourage abuse. It just takes one person screaming about overindulgence by a candidate in the blogosphere before our dull, bored senators decide that something needs “regulating”. The last thing the internet needs is any further government “oversight”. What other people do on thier blogs is not of my business. I just think, personally, that paid political advertising on them is not a good idea.