Continue reading Caving in to pressure, Facebook may rework Beacon

Caving in to pressure, Facebook may rework Beacon originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:55:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

The news that radical left-wing interest group, MoveOn.org, has started to focus their ammunition on popular social networking site Facebook, has to leave one wondering if presidential wannabe Hillary Clinton, is actually behind this move. It's been widely speculated that MoveOn.org, is a front organization for the Democratic Party, and is this a potential "trial balloon" that the Clinton campaign is sending out?

The issue surrounds Facebook's new product, Beacon. MoveOn is claiming that the platform allows advertisers to sell goods to subscribers by placing customized ads in users' conversations. MoveOn calls this a "gross invasion of privacy." MoveOn would know something about invasion of privacy. Their whole agenda is for the government to intrude more and more into our personal lives. See their push for nationalized, socialized medicine.

By adding an opt-in option, I think that Facebook would be fine regarding invasion of privacy. Is MoveOn against an invasion of privacy, or an invasion of capitalism?

I'd love to hear Sen. Clinton's take on all of this. Could she really be against the biggest thing to hit the internet?

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. Disclosure: Writer holds no position in any stock mentioned as of 11/21/07.

Is Hillary Clinton anti-Facebook? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Sun, 25 Nov 2007 14:10:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

The New York Times (NYSE: NYT) has admitted that it gave MoveOn.org a huge discount on a full-page advertisement attacking Iraq commander General David Petraues that it didn't deserve.

Public Editor Clark Hoyt argued in his column yesterday that MoveOn.Org should have paid $142,083 for the "General Betray US?" ad instead of $64,575. The ad also violated the Times' own standards and shouldn't have run in the first place, Hoyt said, pointing out that the ramifications for the blunder are huge.

"It gave the Bush administration and its allies an opportunity to change the subject from questions about an unpopular war to defense of a respected general with nine rows of ribbons on his chest, including a Bronze Star with a V for valor," he said. "And it gave fresh ammunition to a cottage industry that loves to bash the Times as a bastion of the 'liberal media."

Even though the Times screwed up, this error was one of idiocy, not malfeasance. People can buy advertisements that are guaranteed to run on a certain day and those that run at a time that's not guaranteed for a cheaper rate. MoveOn.org, which explains its thinking behind the ad here, should have been charged the more expensive rate.

Continue reading New York Times (NYT) deserves criticism for MoveOn.org ad

New York Times (NYT) deserves criticism for MoveOn.org ad originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 24 Sep 2007 13:55:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.