… IN ADVERTISING
This website recently revised its views on the publication of sexually explicit material. Some believed this decision to be a passing fad (tied to a specific political candidacy, actually), but we honestly felt it was time for us to grow up a bit.
Okay … a lot. We needed to grow up a lot.
Do we have a problem with sexually explicit material? No. Every American is – and should always be – free to look at pornography (assuming it depicts consenting adults). In fact we’ve consistently argued sexual liberty should be taken one step further by the decriminalization of prostitution.
We just decided to make a business – and an editorial decision to limit the amount of flesh we displayed on our pages.
Having said that, we don’t believe there’s anything wrong with running advertisements for sexually explicit service providers – assuming of course those advertisements aren’t themselves sexually explicit.
Take the video spot for (NSFW warning) Jasmin.com – which is a Luxembourg-based adult entertainment website specializing in erotic online chats.
First, here’s the spot …
(Click to play)
Yeah …
Obviously Jasmin.com’s ad is no more – and probably less – racy than advertisements we’ve seen from companies like GoDaddy.com or American Apparel (neither of which sells sexually explicit services). But because Jasmin.com features sexually explicit content, executives at companies like NBC Universal, Fox and Warner Brothers rejected their ad campaign for this week’s Emmy Awards.
“Why is adult entertainment considered taboo, while other ‘vice’ ideas are getting their fair share of ad space?” a Jasmin.com spokesman wondered.
That’s a good question …
It would seem to us that networks ought to judge individual ads based on their content, not necessarily the content of what they advertise. Of course we wholeheartedly support the right of private media outlets to accept – or refuse – advertising as they see fit.
This website certainly wouldn’t feature sexually explicit advertising … but we see no harm in running “safe for work” ads on behalf of sexually explicit providers.
15 comments
What about the fear porn for Tea Party and moral conservatives? Oh yeah, that’s the only stuff they want to read. Carry on…
Because U.S. media are warped, glorifying violence and demonizing sexuality. Didn’t you know that babies are delivered by storks, and only naughty people engage in sexual activity?
Yep, and masturbation can make you go blind
Damn, who turned the lights out – shit, it is dark in here
You grew up by replacing your taste for crack ho skanks w Feloious Punk?
You grew up by replacing your taste for crack ho skanks
Damn, T! Even I wouldn’t have described Haley as that!
Is that what he said ? You have inferred that Haley is a “crack ho”. Why? GT didn’t mention Haley.
In my opinion that would like inferring ‘traitor’ Tom’s old lady is a lesbian because Ervin supports state sanctioned gay marriage which for a self identified , card carrying Republican is political suicide in South Carolina? Why? :-)
This website certainly wouldn’t feature sexually explicit advertising
———-
I know, right? Practicing what you preach would mean you were a *real* libertarian, instead of a LINO.
“LINO” sounds like the cocaine version of a wino.
Time for the weekly gratuitous sex article again?
Now that I understand your policy, if anyone would like pictures of my junk, it will cost you. Contact fitsnews.
“LET’S TALK ABOUT SEX.” ……….well.. ok.. what do you want to know?
Yes, I surfed into “THAT” part of YouTube again. This seemed like a nice place to share some of my discoveries.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TowRCGDH37w
CiC, — too much time on your hands…
Suggested new slogan:
“FITSNews: ALL GROWED UP!”
Taboo 2 can’t even operate under the community’s own policies restricting adult businesses…as they changed them mid-stroke.
Who cares anyway, it’s all internet porn nowadays anyway.