Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Morrus" data-source="post: 2667006" data-attributes="member: 1">That's not what I replied to.  I replied specifically to the assertion that publishers posting press releases was something EN World should be grateful for.  Please do not extend that to refer to anything other than what I actually said.  Please do not apply my replies to one assertion to hypothetical other assertions that haven't actually been made.  We disagree.  I class a PR as advertising, espcially in the context of how they're used here.  This forum "Publishers & Press Releases" is a forum for ads.  That's fine.  It will still be such a forum.  Banner ads sold are also ads, yes - better seen ads, which is why I charge for them.Believe it or not, EN World IS selective in the news it posts.  Always has been.  It's delegated more these days, yes, so it's less selective than it once was when it was one guy posting what he thought would be interesting, but I've never considered myself to have any duty to post all news submitted.  Sometimes there have been opinions in the news, too. Get this - even freakier!  NO press release makes it through to the news age unedited, and never has!  It is posted in the way I (and by extension, the newshounds) feel like it.I agree with you that this is a change in emphasis for EN World.  I believe it to the the direction EN World needs to take in order to be viable long term.  You don't need to post at length to convince me that this is a change - it is a change, and a deliberate one.Note that I got just as much "hassle" (if not more) for the non-partisan act than I am for this act of EN World's self-interest.  The non-partisan approach really did me no favours.  Neither approach makes everybody happy.  The important thing, though, is that EN World continues to prosper, and that means making decisions based purely on their business values from time to time. Again, I'm being misquoted. You're now the second person in one thread to do that.  Please don't.  I did not say that I was being generous and it was all one-way.  I would not say that, ever. I said it was two way, and that people should stop implying to me that it was one way in reverse.  The "you can't do this because you owe the publishers" argument is as invalid as any reverse argument.  Nobody owes anybody anything, everyone has benefitted in some way, all is equal.</blockquote>

Verification