I also said that asking for permission before linking was an "old school" behavior, which was a poor choice of words, so I apologize to anyone who was offended by it.
Below, I have included the e-mail I sent out in response, unedited (except for adding the clickable hyperlinks), for your perusal:
Hi,Well, that's a lot of words. If you have any questions, please drop me a line or leave a comment. Thanks -- Joe
I understand that you will continue to disagree with me because you will look at anything I or do or say in the worst possible light since you are still angry with me about the ad banner situation, but I will have to stand by my position on this.
First off, I would like to apologize if the term "old school" offended anyone; it was not meant as a perjorative, merely to outline the difference in modes of thought between 1996 and 2006.
It is still my firm belief that linking, whether from a personal blog, group blog, blog search engine or media-company's property, is linking, and is an embedded and vital part of Internet and blogging culture.
You only have to look at individuals' blogrolls or shared bookmarks, boingboing.net, digg.com, slashdot.org, metafilter.com, fark.com, obscurestore.com, waxy.org/links, the social bookmarks site del.icio.us, the front pages of MSN, Google (customized version), Yahoo or AOL, BusinessWeek's Blogspotting, Gawker, my own Magic Smoke blog, HuffingtonPost.com, Instapundit.com, Technorati, memeorandum.com, truthlaidbear.com, and any of the multitude of blogs, blog aggregators, blog search engines, or linking blogs out there.
All of these kinds of sites are striving to be useful by linking to interesting or relevant content on the publically-available Web. By being useful to people, the linker is trying to encourage pageviews, repeat visitors, or whatever measure of success that they are using; in return, the linkee gets the extra attention from visitors they might not otherwise have gotten.
These linking sites are not trying to pass this information off as their own -- they are directing people to the original Web sites, so they can go to the source, as well as see whatever else the author has created.
For my own part, I will endeavor to continue notifying AOL bloggers when I individually highlight their blogs (primarily from my Magic Smoke blog). (I suspect the more cynical among you will say "See, he's just trying to get that extra pageview by spamming the blog author.") I will probably not do individual notifications when I am highlighting groups of blogs that I pull up from a search, such as the entries I did for Hurricane Katrina and the London bombing.
As previously noted in my blog, we continue to ask permission in order to use a photo or likeness that appears on an individual's site (which is something that you won't see in a lot of the previously mentioned linking sites).
If you do not wish to have your blog highlighted by me from the areas that I publish, including my Magic Smoke blog and the AOL Journals main page, please let me know and I will do my best to accomodate you.
Finally, if you do not wish to be linked by people whom you do not already know, your best course of action would be to make your blog private, so you can explicitly control who can see your blog.
Thanks,
Joe
9 comments:
Joe you poor thing, you really do have to deal with it, don't you?
For what it's worth I like to think of myself as old school in my life online as well as off - and I did learn from your entries on the subject and sadly admit that I linked up to YOUR journal without permission or more importantly letting you know - I apologize. :o)
Stacy
Personally, I think people just like to complain, regardless. I work in Human Resources and can attest to that being true. LOL. I can't imagine having a blog at work like you do. Oh my, would my life change. You are always having to explain something. Me too, just not over a blog!
Private journal is the way to go for those that don't want to be a part of the blogging culture. It is what it is.
People were just used to the letter that was sent to them before they were "highlighted or spotlighted" somewhere on AOL. As you say, that is not needed anymore as blogging, by its nature includes other links and bloggers in on "your world". People just did not like the fact that something changed on them. I agree about the photo thing though and think that is nice that AOL asks permission on that.
I would imagine it all boils down to the fact that people want to know when they are being highlighted simply for the sake of knowing they are being highlighted and anything apart from knowing is unacceptable to them. But It's just spreading the word, which is kinda like gossip, only it doesn't have to be bad, unless one has been bad in their journal and with their comments. LOL.
Have a good day.
Since I was not on the internet is 1996 or 2000 for that matter, I do not find it old school. I link and I don't ask if I can. Course I will not link to a private blog.
My only brief words to say is "to believe in what you say" & not mess things up. I can remember what is like in "old school" & I really know what is like there from way back so I know how it's like there Joe.
from Rein :)
I don't think you have quite gotten the point some of us have been trying to make. Individuals linking back to other blogs or sites is not the issue. Its the way AOL, as the provider of the service, spotlights individual blogs as a means to promote the blog service (or 'product'), which in turn increases the advertising potential. It would be the same if Nike took a picture of a professional athlete wearing their brand of shoe and used it in a commercial or magazine ad without the person's consent. Individual citizens could take the same photo of that athlete and post it on their blog without being in violation but its a totally different story if the company were to use the photo for its own purposes. All the bloggers are asking for a notification of the feature and the option to decline the publicity. A little courtesy, a little consideration, a little choice. Thats all.
Once upon a time, not so long ago, its was the differences from all of the other servers and providers that made AOL great. Ironically now all AOL seems to want is to be like all of the others, just another service provider, just another portal in cyberspace. I'm beginning to think that AOL doesn't want members who come with opinions and expectations, they want little programmable predictable bots who take what they get without question.
p.s.: For the record I know that you and John are trying hard to be the go-between here and I appreciate that. I hope you don't think I'm just being argumentive for argument's sake. I really do believe there is a serious customer relations problem that AOL (not you guys) is not addressing and that concerns me.
Even though I moved most of my blogs due to the ads and how AOL (not you) handled them, I bear no grudge against you. After all, you're Sexy Pants. ;-)
Although... back in December I came home to an unexpected 6000 hits on one of my TV Journals and 150-some comment e-mails. I figured I was linked somewhere and confirmed it through one of the TV Channel page editor folks. The main screen welcome page. I was off the page by the time I got home from work. I wasn't angry -- to me, hits on the blogs are good. I'm glad people read my blogs. I will admit I was curious and, since I knew who to ask, I did.
I would suggest to folks that if they see any noticeable increase or strange comments (folks were telling me I didn't deserve to win 'Survivor'), check around the likely suspect pages... if TV, Television Channel, food, Food and Home, etc. Those channel pages are a whole 'nuther staff working them. I know Joe wouldn't know as they don't come under his realm.
hi Joe
nat
I used to ask but, everyone always says yes so, I just gave up.
well then, since you posted, I'll copy and paste my response here too.
"You're young Joe. And so, you are forgiven. One day, you'll wake up to all of this.
the issue, once again, - is *common courtesies.*
something that AOL, (are you listening fella's?) never...evah, evah, evah...seems to understand - which is ironic - as their business remember is
- "the people business."
AOL will continue to treat their guests rudely - charge them for the measly "whore-d'orves" - then gloat about hosting a really sh*tty people party -
- just don't be too surprised, AOL, when the "guests" stop showing up.
you know, it was refreshing - I was over at Yahoo, the other day - and gee, I was able to view a whole newscast about the trapped miners - without ONE damn advertisement. It was lovely.
And informative.
And for the record, no, that is not considered "Old School" thinking - that is just being a gracious and appreciative host.
aol,
*is*
old school."
dispensation has been granted to you only Joe - now for your penance - now say three Hail Mary's and a Glory Be.
Post a Comment