I had planned only to write about how blogging can hurt your career, but I think there is something else I need to address first. Other Sciblings have already written about it and a few of you have sent me emails and left comments. It's also the buzz over on Twitter.
I know about the mail order bride ads and the naughty singles ads. As DrugMonkey echoes in his preceding post, I think it is a shame that these ads showed up after our month long Silence is the Enemy campaign. I think all of the bloggers at ScienceBlogs agree that advertising the sexual exploitation of vulnerable women of limited economic means is disgusting.
When the ads were first brought to my attention I contacted the management of ScienceBlogs. They assured me (and the other bloggers here) that the ads would be removed. I hope that they are sincere and have no reason to believe that they are not.
Still, even today when I went over to Drugmonkey's site to get the link for his mail order bride post, I saw this:
This makes me feel sad, and if you've been visiting me for any length of time then you know how I feel about the exploitation of women, especially racial minorities and women from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. That's the entire point of the Letters to Our Daughters Project and the Silence is the Enemy Project, right?
That said, I cannot in good faith continue to contribute content here while these ads remain visible. This also makes me sad because I love being at ScienceBlogs. I love my Sciblings (well, most of them) and I believe in the establishment of community for the promotion of science. But, it would not be right for my page views to generate revenue that funds individuals who exploit women. The morality in this matter seems pretty black and white.
I believe the management here at ScienceBlogs when they tell me that they are working to have their ad agency remove the ads, but the traffic generated in the meantime while those ads still appear still puts money in the pockets of those who exploit women. So, until I receive confirmation from the Overlords here at ScienceBlogs that these ads are gone, I'm taking a hiatus. If the hiatus becomes extended and I feel an urge to blog in the interim, I may retreat to my old home at Blogspot.
I pray that my hiatus is brief and wish all of you a very happy 4th of July weekend.
All my love,
Isis
Life Science
Politics
Comments
Good move. Don't stand for it. In the meantime enjoy the time off.
Posted by: Adam M. Goldstein | July 2, 2009 5:58 PM
Guest post at Comrade PhysioProf!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Comrade PhysioProf | July 2, 2009 7:22 PM
ScienceBlogs is dead to me.
Posted by: Lola | July 2, 2009 8:32 PM
Kudos, Dr. Isis!
Is there anything those of us who don't have a ScienceBlog can do about the ads (other than not visit the site, not click on ads, etc)? Is there a moderator/admin we can email?
Posted by: jenny | July 2, 2009 8:35 PM
jenny right down at the bottom is a link for contacting Sb
http://scienceblogs.com/channel/about.php#contact
advertising@scienceblogs.com and editorial@scienceblogs.com would be good places to register your objections.
Posted by: DM | July 2, 2009 8:58 PM
Hi,
Just a beside the point comment, you say that you pray your hiatus is brief...
Who does Isis pray to? Osiris?
Otherwise, stick to your guns! Those ads have no place in this venue. Good luck!1
Posted by: Ron | July 2, 2009 9:06 PM
"naughty" ads?
Posted by: Isabel | July 2, 2009 9:27 PM
I will miss you while you are on hiatus. I will try to visit from time to time to monitor which ads are being displayed.
Posted by: Harold | July 2, 2009 9:29 PM
I cannot see any ads, because I remorselessly began using AdBlocker (for the first time, too!) after I not only spotted a series of Russian Mail-Order Bride ads a few nights ago but also learned that their placement here isn't the result of hackers' pranks. I'm sorry to keep hearing from several quarters that those ads are still here. These particular ads disgust me for several reasons.
I adore you, Dr. Isis, and I hope you can return to ScienceBlogs soon.
Posted by: Juniper Shoemaker | July 2, 2009 9:45 PM
I don't think your response is doing quite what you think it is, though I certainly agree the ads are horrible.
The ad is not putting money into anyone's pocket except ScienceBlogs and their ad agency. The sickening company is paying for either page views or clicks, so by limiting those page views and clicks from a readership completely unlikely to purchase a bride is actually going to save the company money.
I think somebody should have sicced PZ's minions on them, clicking incessantly!
Posted by: Donna B. | July 2, 2009 9:55 PM
firefox + adblock plus + noscript = leigh does not see this shit, or support it in any way by loading the ad image whatsoever, or support the website that hosts such garbage.
Posted by: leigh | July 2, 2009 10:12 PM
darling isis, i agree with you completely. but please, please return to your shenanigans at blogspot... some days your hilarity is all that keeps me sane. and i'm guessing others feel the same way.
Posted by: seeree, phd | July 2, 2009 10:36 PM
Hoping your hiatus is brief and this advertising content is removed promptly!
Posted by: Academic | July 2, 2009 11:45 PM
My own suggestion when HSUS ads showed up on my site was to click like mad and take their money:
http://pascalesthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/06/google-oops.html
Isis has taken the high ground. I hope she joins us over at blogspot after the holiday.
Posted by: Pascale | July 2, 2009 11:59 PM
What Leigh said.
Posted by: RickD | July 3, 2009 12:38 AM
Will you be returning the money SB pays you for blogging with them? Some at least of that will have come from clicks on the ads you despise.
Posted by: Bibi | July 3, 2009 8:31 AM
I do not think you would have a problem if you retreat to your old blog. That is where I started reading you and I think your new readership from this blog would follow. However, you would lose whatever income you earn here. The other option is to see whether discovery magazine blogs is willing to pick you up. They tend to be more "family friendly" then your current blogging style which is more adult oriented. I have kinda stayed away from all blogs for the past couple of weeks as reading and posting has kept me from the things I really need to get done. Good luck to you.
Posted by: Danimal | July 3, 2009 10:28 AM
Thank you for all of us out there. Thank you for always taking a stand.
Posted by: DocMariaE | July 3, 2009 11:46 AM
Dr. Isis - I hope that the ads disappear soon and that you can come back - I just started reading your blog and it would be a shame to have it stop now.
Posted by: Paul S. | July 3, 2009 12:10 PM
I understand that clicking means they pay more, but it also encourages them to think that people want their product. In any case, the presence of the ads makes it look like ScienceBlogs and Seed are perfectly happy with sexism and pseudoscience woo and human trafficking. I'm glad you and other scibloggers are making a stink about this.
Posted by: Carlie | July 3, 2009 12:42 PM
Considering I've had internet access for about a decade and a half now, I've come to tune out the ads, so I have to honestly say that if I saw an ad like that I wouldn't pay much attention. Shame, really, or I'd probably have made the connection some time ago.
I don't blame you one bit, Isis. I hope Seed is already dealing with it; they can't really ignore protests from their writers.
Posted by: Brian X | July 4, 2009 12:36 AM
From Zaska's Blog:
I've never seen the ads. They're probably based on geographic region. The program serves different ads based on your ip (location).
I would love to see what all the fuss is about. That being said... I find it funny using words such as "exploit women".
The only person you can call exploited is one who has a gun pointed to their gun and physically forced to do something. Women who voluntarily choose to sell their looks and dignity in exchange for a better life can hardly be called "exploited".
I find it kind of ironic that most of these commentaries about "exploitation" are coming from rich, white women who've never seen a day of hardship in their life. When was the last time you saw such a complaint coming from one of the actual women affected?
So you get the ads removed. Does ignoring the problem solve it? Those women will still be poor and barely making ends meet. How about fighting FOR something, like say donating to groups that go around the world and provide those women with education? Its very easy to fight AGAINST something, but it never solves a problem.
Posted by: AlekNovy | July 4, 2009 9:23 AM
"The only person you can call exploited is one who has a gun pointed to their gun and physically forced to do something. Women who voluntarily choose to sell their looks and dignity in exchange for a better life can hardly be called 'exploited'."
Economic coercion is still coercion, numbskull.
"How about fighting FOR something, like say donating to groups that go around the world and provide those women with education?"
You dumbass, have you been paying attention to this Silence is the Enemy thing at all? You know, that effort to help fund Docs without Borders and other orgs that help disadvantaged women - that this and many other blogs on this site have been contributing to all June? http://scienceblogs.com/isisthescientist/2009/06/silence_is_the_enemy_-_an_upda.php
Way to completely undermine your point.
Also, three cheers for Isis. I've been more-or-less boycotting scienceblogs, except to check this and/or Zuska's page to see when this shit has been fixed.
Posted by: Muse142 | July 5, 2009 1:57 PM
So, ummm, how will we know that the problem's been fixed? Has anyone seen the offending ads lately?
Posted by: Harold | July 6, 2009 12:48 AM
You don't need a gun to exploit someone, idiot.
...So I guess "Silence is the Enemy" and "Docs without Borders" just don't...exist, is that right? What about "Letters to our Daughters"?
It's so easy to ASSume, AlekNovy, but perhaps you might not want to do that any longer if you'd rather not look like an ignorant ass.
Posted by: marilove | July 6, 2009 10:54 AM
marilove:
Best not pay attention to AlekNovy. He's the sort of person who sits around being a sexist, classist pig while denying it to his dying breath. He's been trolling over at GrrlScientist's too.
Posted by: BrianX | July 6, 2009 1:05 PM