Skip

The Homo market
March 19, 2007 9:39 PM   Subscribe

Ampd customer support responds to Michael Pusateri's complaint over their advertising on Ann Coulter's site. They are a-political [sic] and try to reach "as many segments of the market as possible" - Homo, bisexual, and Republican.
posted by stevil (21 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

 
I enjoy how really bad grammar, spacing, spelling, punctuation and the like makes one come across like Cletus-the-slack-jawed-yokel. YMMV.
posted by stevil at 9:40 PM on March 19, 2007


It's the thought that counts. Aren't Ampd a repackaging of someone else's infrastructure? They go for the market who wouldn't bat a badly-mascara'd eyelash above their vacant eyes at calling the gay community the 'homos', so their customer service reps are probably picked from the same demographic.
posted by Firas at 9:53 PM on March 19, 2007


I went down to the Homo and bisexual market the other day. Nice bunch of vendors there.
posted by interrobang at 9:57 PM on March 19, 2007 [1 favorite]


It's rebranded Verizon. I work with Verizon.
posted by Samizdata at 10:02 PM on March 19, 2007


Who cares?

You advertise on Ann Coulters web site. She is offensive and bigoted.
You should not advertise on her site.


Compelling argument.
posted by mek at 10:04 PM on March 19, 2007




I actually thought that the response, bad grammar and all, was okay. I believe whoever wrote it meant the homosexual and bisexual markets but shortened it to try and make it sound clearer.

Now whether they used the correct terms that people are comfortable with, that's up for debate.

I still have a question. Can I still pick up groceries at the homo and bisexual markets?
posted by crashlanding at 10:24 PM on March 19, 2007


Only if you're smashingly dressed.
posted by Firas at 10:28 PM on March 19, 2007


Although, upon further reflection, and ignoring grammatical and syntactic oddities, that I think it was pleasantly surprising that someone took the time to actually compose an original response, rather than going the three ring binder route and dispensing a canned message....
posted by Samizdata at 10:57 PM on March 19, 2007


I believe whoever wrote it meant the homosexual and bisexual markets but shortened it to try and make it sound clearer.

Indeed, if they had written: "the homo- and bisexual" market it would have changed the whole meaning. A little hyphen goes a long way.
posted by delmoi at 10:58 PM on March 19, 2007


Yeah, but delmoi, whoever wrote it obviously doesn't have a proper grasp of grammatical rules, or just didn't care and wanted to plow through a pile of emails.

Judging by the blogger's original email and reaction to the response, he seems like a huge pain in the ass. I'm surprised that a company took the time to write a pleasant and honest response to his unreasonable request.

amazon.com also advertises on her blog, I wonder if he emailed them as well.

If this was a press release that had been signed by someone high up in the company and not a response to an email, then it might be worth getting mad about.
posted by crashlanding at 11:09 PM on March 19, 2007


I admire the concept of equal opportunity offensiveness. That's been my goal for years.
posted by CCBC at 2:18 AM on March 20, 2007


You advertise on Ann Coulters web site. She is offensive and bigoted.
You should not advertise on her site.

Compelling argument.


It would be compelling to me if I were an advertiser. I wouldn't want my ads appearing next to offensive (to my demographic) content any more than I'd want them in a 60 Minutes segment false advertisers.
posted by DU at 4:19 AM on March 20, 2007


Geez, of all my better content, a cut & paste email of mine makes it to MeFi only to be savaged by the snarkiness of the blue.

Glad to know that I'm a "huge pain in the ass" crashlanding. But before you throw the hate you should do the research. Amazon does not advertise on Coulter's site, what you see are referral links, that she posted on her site, where she only gets paid if someone buys a book.

As far as the Ampd response, I wasn't mad at all. My goal was to cause Ms. Coulter a bit of pain in the most capitalistic way possible by letting the market decide. I was mainly shocked by the Ampd response, not so much that they defended themselves, but that it's so wildly off-script.

I work for a trans-national mega-corp that often comes under assault for decisions and that kind of email would likely cause a huge freakout in marketing and communications.
posted by Argyle at 5:49 AM on March 20, 2007 [1 favorite]


Interesting. The main thing I take away from that exchange is that Ampd appears to have customer service staffed by actual human beings.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:10 AM on March 20, 2007


Reminds me of someone pointing out, long ago, that the truest sign of really good AI is that it can make math errors. Why not extend that to grammar and spelling and tact when doing a Turing test? ; )
posted by DoctorFedora at 6:38 AM on March 20, 2007


Reminds me of someone pointing out, long ago, that the truest sign of really good AI is that it can make math errors. Why not extend that to grammar and spelling and tact when doing a Turing test? ; )

I'm pretty sure they do, actually.
posted by delmoi at 7:54 AM on March 20, 2007


Ecce Homo
(Ecrasez l’infame)

I’m not sure how (unless I’m missing some nuance) essentially: “we go wherever the profit lies” is a laudable moral position. I always thought the U.S. flag was a “stick it in your ass” sort of irony concerning the East India company as opposed to a “profit at all costs” sort of statement. Oh certainly one can argue the influence of multinationals and sundry corporations today, but such things were always disparaged as being antagonistic to individual rights.
Not that they don’t have a right to do business and not that they don’t have a legitimate legal leg to stand on. But insofar as a genuine rebuttal as to why they shouldn’t advertise with someone - it doesn’t cut any ice with me.
Not denying a segment of the market (homosexuals, bisexuals, bigots) access to one’s product is just good business. Advertising with someone who advocates against the rights of those people might not imply agreement, but it certainly isn’t a defense to say “well, you can buy our stuff too.” They explained why they can, not why they do. Not sure how that would stop someone who wanted to boycott their product:
“Look guys, they said they sell to homos too. So it’s ok.”
Well, f’ing duh. When it comes to business the only color that matters is green. The fact of it doesn’t make it an ethical position.
posted by Smedleyman at 8:41 AM on March 20, 2007


While I despise amp'd for their reprehensible advertising campaign, which suggests that it would be great to retreat from humanity into a mediated fantasy world where you can force people to degrade themselves for your entertainment, this response seems straightforward. I think the message Smedleyman extracts (we're following the money and fuck the message) is exactly what they meant to communicate: they are not claiming a moral high ground, just asserting that they personally don't have a particular bias for or against anything.

In an I'm-not-quite-sure-how-it's-related note, I've been to the post twice, and each time the advertisements have come up with ads for Ann Coulter - one to sign up for a free email feed to her column, one for an Ann Coulter ringtone, whatever the hell that means. It doesn't seem to far of a stretch that to some tiny degree Coulter is funding that column. But does that make the writer a hypocrite?
posted by nanojath at 9:42 AM on March 20, 2007


nanojath: "one for an Ann Coulter ringtone, whatever the hell that means."

I think I found the source for the Ann Coulter ringtone.
posted by Mr. Gunn at 10:00 AM on March 20, 2007


Feh. The grammar in the complainer's e-mail was just as bad. (Apostrophe key broken?) The real crime is that I chose to read this. It's like watching a couple of 3rd-graders struggle to express themselves in print. Not pretty.
posted by turducken at 11:33 AM on March 20, 2007


« Older Man with a Movie Blog   |   Now those are some bodacious Tatas. Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post