As violence continues to hammer the Gaza Strip, Muslim groups are calling for a boycott of goods produced by The Coca-Cola Company (NYSE: KO), Starbucks Corporation (NASDAQ: SBUX), and other U.S. companies. The boycott is meant to protest the alliance between Israel and the U.S., and it comes as the U.S. embassy in Malaysia is being swarmed with thousands of angry protesters.

"We urge Muslim consumers internationally to unite so that we can teach a lesson to Israel and its allies," said Ma'amor Osman, an official with the Muslim Consumers Association of Malaysia. "This is to object to the arrogance and cruelty of Israel and its allies towards the Palestinians."

Additionally, the group is urging the Malaysian government to cease its contract agreements with U.S.-based firms. Former Malaysian premier Mahathir Mohamad is also jumping on the bandwagon, calling for Muslims to stop using the U.S. dollar. "If enough of us do this, then [the dollar's] value will fall, just like what they did to us in 1997," he asserted.

I almost can't believe that I'm writing about this, but I guess some prudes will get up in arms about anything.

BBC News reports that a U.S. based Christian group known as The Resistance is calling for a nationwide boycott of the coffee selling giant, Starbucks Corp. (NASDAQ: SBUX). The group's complaint against the company stems from the commemorative use of a toned-down version of the company's original logo. Starbucks states that the logo, which features a dual-tailed mermaid sporting cleavage, is not inappropriate. The fringe Christian group refers to the logo as a naked woman with legs "spread like a prostitute."

The news report from BBC states: "Howard Schultz, who bought Starbucks in 1982, described the emblem in his memoirs as "bare-breasted and Rubenesque; [it] was supposed to be as seductive as coffee itself."

To look at the logo that is claimed to offend, one has a difficult time even seeing it as raunchy. To call the flared dual tails a pair of spread legs might be a feat best accomplished while on serious hallucinogens. Clearly, this group of well-meaning Christians is at a loss for real issues to attack. The fringe group's lack of imagination in seeking some media exposure for itself is seen by me as a shallow act of spotlight grabbing.

Starbucks is reported by the BBC as stating that the bare breasted mermaid will appear on some of its cups for several weeks as part of a company promotion. It was not revealed which of Starbucks' 16,000 coffee shops in 44 countries will be featuring the racy mermaid cups. However, I'm sure that anyone who is interested in getting one of these alleged soft-porn coffee cups may rest assured that, before too long, they'll be available to anyone via eBay.

To see all 10 of Sarah Gilbert's top 10 best and worst naked advertising campaigns, click here.

Despite some conflicting reports that indicate that the current sellers strike on eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY) has led to a 13% decline in product listings, eBay claims that the strike has had no effect on its listings.

According to company spokesmen Usher Lieberman, the company definitely "didn't feel an impact from the strike." While sellers have hoped that the current boycott would lead to the reversal of the latest fee changes, Lieberman has declared that no changes will be made.

So now we are basically in posturing mode between eBay and its sellers. The sellers have decided to extend the strike another week in hopes that eBay will reconsider its decision. My advice to the sellers: don't hold your breath. Even if eBay does start to feel some pain from the strike, chances are low that it will give in.

Last week I wrote a couple pieces on the current seller strike over at e-commerce giant eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY). The strike was supposed to last until today, but now it has been extended another week. Initial data is showing that the current eBay strike has lowered the items listed for sale on the site by an impressive 13%, so you can be sure that eBay is paying attention.

As most of you are already aware, the current strike is the result of frustrations by eBay users over a couple new changes that the site has introduced. While the site lowered its initial listing fees for items, it raised its completion fees. This has been seen by power sellers as a direct attack on the more successful eBay sellers. In addition, eBay has decided to keep sellers from leaving negative feedback on buyers, a move that has infuriated sellers who claim that feedback is their best defense in avoiding dead-beat bidders. The final straw came in the decision to hold certain PayPal payments for up to 21 days.

The strike, which started last week, has had a couple of impacts on the e-commerce world. One result that I examined last week, was the increase in traffic and users to some smaller e-commerce sites that historically have had a hard time breaking into some of eBay coveted traffic. Now we are starting to see just how hard the strike has been hitting eBay itself. According to reports, the site has seen a 13% drop in its auction listings.

I'm actually finding the cries of anguish coming from eBay sellers a bit amusing these days. Yes, in my opinion they're getting what they deserve over on eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY).

Why do I say that with a cold-hearted grin you may ask? It's because I did my part so long ago. Yes, we had a seller's strike once before, and it was a pretty damn good one. It didn't work then either, or at least it didn't change any eBay corporate minds in reference to anything that matters.

So now eBay has raised fees again. I don't need to say I told you so, but I did. This time though there's a significant additional angle to the rift. Due to pending changes to eBay's feedback system, sellers could be left defenseless in the face of potential deadbeat buyers, four of which have struck my wife's eBay selling account in the last week. It's great service to eBay's vision and it's easy logic to grasp and accept if you have insight into eBay's plans.

In a broad and sweeping move that will send out reverberations similar in impact to the first sixteen bars of a Van Halen song, the Cabletelevision Advertising Bureau announced that they shall have nothing further to do with a major attempt to commoditize television advertising time by making that time available for purchase in an online auction type venue. New York Times.com (registration required) reported that the Cabletelevision Advertising Bureau, a New York based trade group, has officially backed away from the proposition citing a quote from Sean Cunningham, president and chief executive of the cable association clearly stating that, "We don't believe that eBay is going to get this right."

Using the word "boycott," cable entertainment providers including ESPN, Discovery Channel, and Lifetime have officially exited the program, leaving the eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY) headed project without any air time to sell. A consortium of heavy hitters were backing eBay in the experiment and had committed up to $50 million to build and test the model. Now though, they may be left high and dry, wondering if they have hired eBay expertise for zero gain after all.

Perhaps the most powerful statement in this situation so far is the reluctance of Google to issue any statement at all regarding the cable television pullout, as evidenced in a Jupiter Research blog post by David Card. Being that Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) is so deeply entrenched in the internet as an advertising sales vehicle, one must suppose that they have taken this development pretty hard. That is, of course, unless they approached it with a "wait and see" attitude right from the start. If no statement issues from Google in the coming week, we might be tempted to think that Google suspected that the effort could fail miserably from the time it got off the ground.

I warned of this development quite some time ago in a comment section right here on a BloggingStock eBay post. I cited the fact that the television advertising industry has had a very firm grip on what they are doing for about 50 or so years now. I find it silly to think that the program would be changed over night. Just because a few talking heads say they want to take over the sale of television advertising time won't make it so. Personally, I think trying to change the dynamics of how television advertising is sold would be something similar to trying to sink the USS Enterprise with a .22 pistol.

But that's just my opinion.

Political and religous groups recently requested a boycott of two high-profile US companies, Starbucks (SBUX) and Coca Cola (KO), in predominately Muslim Malaysia. The boycott seeks to protest "US failure to prevent Israel's military actions" against Hezbollah in Gaza and southern Lebanon. Organizer Jamarulkhan Kadir is quoted in the Agence France-Presse news service story saying that a similar boycott three years ago protesting the US invasion of Iraq made a "dent' in sales. Last time I checked, the US is still in Iraq.

In any case, Norman Fernandez writing to www.malaysiakini.com, urges Malaysians to strongly consider the national impact before participating in such a boycott. The US is Malaysia's largest trade partner and Fernandez sites that that trade relationship is valued at $44 billion a year (2005).

Michael Canfield is a private investor, a business and media writer, living in Seattle. He doesn't own stock in Starbucks.