NSA’s Targeting Prowess Doesn’t Extend To Ads

This Article in TechCrunch struck a chord with me. I have been following the recent news about the extensive profiles that the government has compiled about citizens using information obtained from online activity and sources. While I find much of it intrusive and moral grey area I don't have an objection with their ability to advertise wherever they darn well please.

The article is a rant from a TechCrunch writer who has recently written some scathing articles regarding the NSA's questionable methods for gathering data on U.S. citizens. He doesn't agree with the methods and also doesn't like that the NSA has now started running banner ads (as shown in the article) on the very pages where he is berating them through his column.

Wilhelm, the author, states "I’ve never felt a conflict of interest with an advertisement before, due in no small part to the fact that I tune them out like the rest of you. But to have the NSA directly hawking its wares on pages that sport my name doesn’t sit right with me." he also states, "I suppose it is vaguely democratic to grant them part of our space to make their case, but as this is a financial relationship (they pay us, either directly or through a third-party), it’s not a question of free speech."

So, would it be ok for places like TechCrunch to limit what ads show up on their pages? Actually, they can do this through AdSense. The maximum number of advertiser URLs that can be blocked is 500 per AdSense product. The 500 blocks can be applied at the site level or at the product level and in any combination. I think that the NSA has a right to advertise but TechCrunch has a right to advertise...but will TechCrunch stand behind its writers words and block them? Doubtful. 

http://techcrunch.com/2013/09/28/nsas-targeting-prowess-doesnt-extend-to-ads/