I have been defending Steve Bannon from association with white supremacy and anti-semitism. I also defend Breitbart News, from such accusations. However, I must now defend Kellogg's from Breitbart's boycott campaign against the cereal company. Kellogg's pulled their advertising from Breitbart's because of perceptions referenced above. Breitbart in turn started the boycott in response. There is no obligation for a company to advertise with a media outlet, and there should be no penalty for ending the relationship, regardless of the reason. I can only think that this tactic will hurt Breitbart more in the long term. Monetizing web sites is no easy matter. Kellogg's undoubtedly advertised with Breitbart because of their growing readership. Although, they decided to end the relationship for political reasons, that is their prerogative. Breitbart's niche is being conservative in a mostly liberal field. Perhaps the only other site of their size is Drudge Report. I think that Breitbart should have a firewall between their editorial position and their advertising department. To end up being boycotted after spending your advertising dollars doesn't seem a worthwhile dollar placement. I suspect that other potential advertisers will take notice.
Briebart used to be one of my faithful morning reads. That is no longer the case, although I read it occasionally. A major reason for that is that Briebart is agenda-driven. There are a lot of minions on the right there, just as there are for left-leaning websites.
ReplyDeleteMany people don't like the way the site has changed over the past year or so. Not counting the election-driven articles, but the way the contributors are more and more "agree with me or you're a troll and I'll attack you". Your comment above, not supporting the Kellogg boycott would draw them like flies, and in not civil ways either. I don't like organized boycotts at all, and this stupid one against Kellogg is drawing all of the zealots like honey. It's like Birebart is organizing an army of extreme trolls and if you don't join in, either shut up (as I do), or you'll hear about it in a bad way.
I suppose this entire episode shows just how far the internet has come over the past decade or so. I recall advertising on websites was quaint and it was a way to make a few dollars, but not much. Now it's a multi million dollar enterprise, which is why this news in itself as Kellogg pushed Birebart's money button and in return the site is using its large readership as a weapon against it.
There are better places to go for your morning read but I won't advertise them here. I occasionally comment on Briebart, but recently it's far, far less than I did a year ago.
Never read them but the Left uses boycotts routinely to discourage advertisers on any and all conservative outlets.
ReplyDeleteI have to think the reverse boycott is a bit tongue and cheek if it's Brietbart.But again, just guessing.
Visit Breibart occasionally, check out zerohedge.com
ReplyDeleteThe author Russell Kirk wrote in The Conservative Mind that conservatives have no version of das kapital or ten points of conservatism; that it is absent ideology. Many people have a tendency towards ideology, my way or no way thinking, that must be resisted. I have shared with others, especially Christians, that we must resist wanting to wield the sword, to strike down our enemies like the authoritarian left has done these last 100 years in there "earthly paradises". It is why we can disagree and still maintain our coalition; it is why many conservatives could support Trump though he's not the ideal candidate. This Kellogg boycott reminds me of the two-minutes hate in the book 1984. It too should be resisted.
ReplyDeleteTo Scott's point, many authoritarian left wing groups and left wing CEO's have been attacking conservatives for many years by demonizing and trying to silence conservative voices. We see this almost weekly with conservative speakers being attacked or outright banned from college campuses. Or the many stories of conservative students living in fear that their professors will give them a bad grade for holding a conservative view point. In this election we saw reports of social media sites hiding stories harmful to Hillary that were popular among conservatives and one site admitting they were editing their critics comments. We also see it when people express an opinion counter to the authoritarian left being harassed and fired from their jobs. These types of attacks need to be resisted. Sites like Breitbart and the Project Veritas Group have gone on the offensive by exposing how the authoritarian left operates.
ReplyDeleteI don't like being told what to boycott by political websites. If I don't want to buy something, it's because "I" don't want to, not because someone else told me to.
ReplyDeleteThat's the same kind of thing the Democrats do and I don't like them doing it either.
I'm for the boycott of Kelloggs...just for the fun of it. I agree with Jamie's comment but we conservatives have been saps for so long it's a joy just to see liberals fume at the thought of a reverse boycott. Worry not, liberals, because I will forget whom to boycott by the time I get to the Giant. lol
ReplyDeleteMM,
ReplyDeleteSeems like the cheap chips advertisement a list hard at work?
I think the main point MM was trying to make is advertisers always choose media outlets and programs where they think will get the most bang for their bucks. Instead--like every other recent post-- this has degenerated into bashing other people's political beliefs. Give it a rest already !
ReplyDeleteLVCI...yes, but they don't ever announce a media outlet they are NOT advertising in...and then go on the list a reason.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was in ad buying I never put out a press release saying I was NOT going to advertise on WXYZ. Kelloggs entered the political arena so they are open to both criticism and suggested boycotts.
Heck, I know many people who still won't shop at Target after pridefully telling little girls they would have to sit in a bathroom with uncle Fester.
"When I was in ad buying I never put out a press release saying I was NOT going to advertise on WXYZ"
ReplyDeleteNo but when I worked in radio plenty of advertisers left me know why they weren't buying air time. at my station. This was always done. I never held it against them. Local Lehigh Valley union heads at election time put a great deal of pressure on me to slant the news in their favor. I never made that public.
Times may have changed- but the reasons why reputable reporters shouldn't be blowing this up has not. That's what a responsible journalist does. Ignores the pressure from advertisers and others with self interests without seeking retribution even if others gone public against them.
LVCI, you surely aren't comparing a private conversation between a client and radio newsman about why he doesn't advertise because of a certain on-air personality, with a public declaration by Kelloggs.
ReplyDeleteEight long years Democrats bashed ANYONE whose ideas did not even REMOTELY laud and praise theirs ...
ReplyDelete