Following a day or two of discussion as to whether white label social networking provider Ning was seeing most of its traffic due to porn, founder Marc Andreessen has posted a response.
Andreessen argues that Ning isn’t pro-porn, but pro-feedom, going on to say that “we think a better approach is to let people fundamentally do what they want, as long as it isn’t illegal and doesn’t otherwise violate our terms of service.”
Not surprisingly the anti-porn zealots are up in arms, claiming that it’s a shallow argument being used to protect a porn ring. The idea that Ning relies on porn came via statistics from Quantcast that suggest that Ning’s biggest sites are porn related.
There’s a couple of different arguments in play here. Andreessen argues that Quantcast, along with most tracking services don’t accurately reflect actual traffic and that traffic to Ning does not have a heavy preference for porn related social networking sites. It’s an old argument that is likely true, but we won’t dedicate a post (at least today) to the flaws of online tracking services. You can always read Michael’s various anti-Alexa posts here and here.
On the freedom of speech side the argument has validity, after all if as Andreessen says there is nothing illegal in what some people are using Ning for, why should Ning move to block this unless it’s a call based on morality alone. To quote Andreessen:
To prevent porn, you have to take an activist stand against freedom of expression — you have to get in there and judge content, judge people, judge intent, and take action based on your judgments. I would never criticize a company for doing so, but I don’t want to do that, and we as a company don’t want to do that.
We think a better approach is to let people fundamentally do what they want, as long as it isn’t illegal and doesn’t otherwise violate our terms of service.
Call it being agnostic.
And we extend this agnostic attitude to our entire service — porn, yes, but also other potentially controversial activities, ranging from political activism and protest organizing, to circumvention of censorship regimes, through to extreme cases like smuggled videos of human rights abuses in totalitarian societies.
He also goes on to note that a good portion of traffic on Yahoo is porn related as well (in particular Yahoo Groups) and even Google. Both good points; turn safe search off on Google Images for a minute then try a couple of adult search terms. Sure the counter argument is that Google isn’t hosting it (well, Blogger blogs aside and then there’s the thumbnails and cached versions), but they could block it as well.
Ultimately we’ll let you be the judge in the comments and with this poll:
In the name of “freedom”.. in the name of “democracy”.. everything goes…
The same is true of magnify.net, which is very much like Ning, but for Youtube instead of MySpace.
http://www.alexa.com/data/deta.....agnify.net
Scroll down to “Where people go on Magnify.net:”
and paste some of those urls in your browser. You can do the same for Ning
I personally wish porn would go away (I’ve seen plenty of it). But “the porn issue” is a morality issue that needs to be decided by the people…not by corporations/businesses. It only exists because society wants it to. Those “against” porn should educate society about the reasons they feel porn is harmful and let them decide. The day people no longer want to watch or decide to no longer watch porn is the day it disappears.
So I support Ning’s stance on it
The internet is a platform that promotes freedom of expression in a way never seen before. As such, Ning is a platform that allows people to create social sites around any theme they desire.
Now, if data came out that the majority of Ning networks were athiest networks, then the creationists would be up in arms. Someone is always up in arms. Gosh, people are so easily offended. You don’t like a site–fine, don’t go to it.
I believe Ning is doing the right thing. It is neither their job nor right to police the social networks people create on their platform. They provide the tools; what their users do is up to them.
Trying to morally police your users is a slippery slope.
good move, the problem with these nut jobs is that they are like parasites, you give in to one, and a billion others will flood you.
It’s a tough issue. Either you employ hundreds (thousands?) of people to screen for objectionable content or you simply have to throw up your hands and say “anything goes.” What I’m curious to hear though is how actively filtering content affects the immunity status that many sites (e.g., YouTube, MySpace, etc.) claim under the DMCA. In other words, does not filtering for porn also offer the ancillary benefit that Ning is potentially less likely to be liable for copyrighted content than other sites might be?
Firstly, I would take issue with Quantcast’s claims about the distribution of Ning’s traffic.
Pomoworld.ning.com (That’s “Po-mo” not “porno”–My eye skipped past that initially), is the most trafficked sub-domain. Emotionally sensitive, post-modern human experience social networkers take the traffic crown on Ning. And not a boobie in sight.
And the second-most trafficked–”girlongirl.ning.com” isn’t nearly as risque as it sounds…rather it’s a “hot or not” type time waster, using pictures of attractive, if completely clothed (shucks!) women–try as you might, there’s not a lot of skin flying around, at least on the initial pages. Some of the woman appear to be adult film actresses, but there is nothing on their profiles that could be called “porn” with a straight face. It’s more like Maxim magazine implementing an affiliate pay-per-action play.
I won’t comment on “whiteholesblackpoles.ning.com”…however, that seemingly porno-inspired Ning network is still being beaten out by ASPCA’s online community.
That’s right people: critics of Ning clearly hate puppy dogs and kitties, not to mention poets and other sensitive souls.
I for one take the adoption of Ning by porn-users (even as limitedly as it appears to be, as of yet) as an extraordinarily positive sign for the service. Historically, new technologies that went on to do great things were early adopted for the delivery of pornographic material–from VHS, to DVD, to the, gasp, internet.
Lastly, people freaking out about Ning being used for porn might as well start picketing Comcast, SBC, Akamai, Level3, Google, and all the other massive bit deliverers. The intarweb’s bit budget is still very much influenced by pornographic impulses. You think my parent’s are using BitTorrent to download Deadwood? Har. Lolz. Not.
This is a massive tempest in a tea cup. And as far as I’m concerned, I’d be buying shares in Ning right now. Crap. They’re not public.
ning is right…but advertisers should be careful giving $$ to ning as their ads are displayed along with porn content
More power to Ning and their porn networks. Yes, I agree, it’s about freedom. However, if you’re creating a Ning site the issue is that there’s a good chance your Ning network ends up being placed right next to a porn network (just check out the Ning network directory). Not necessarily the kind of thing certain people would want…oh say if you’re a church, school or consumer brand! Being part of a large network of networks that includes porn should make any brand, network or community leader pause and seriously consider whether Ning’s model is right for them. It’s about brand and association. That’s one of the differences between building a network on Ning and one of the other white label solutions (which Ning IS NOT!).
Basically the same argument Larry Flint put forth a long time ago. I agree with Andreessen. If you do not like it you do not have to watch it. And as long as you are not braking laws (however we can argue about the validity or common sense of some laws and their background) including terms of services, it is a matter of choice and good taste.
Well - it’s also interesting to note that one of the reasons for Netscape’s founding was to better ‘handle images on the web’ (basically driven by porn is the way it was put to me by a friend who recalled it from one of Andreessen’s talks).
And, he shouldn’t forget the argument that the fact Ning is stocked with porn is an indicator it’s a truly revolutionary technology. There’s a long and noble history of new technologies emerging, being used by the porn industry, and then seeping into mainstream culture as people figure out more socially acceptable mainstream uses — Blockbuster wasn’t even a glimmer in the eye when VHS emerged; it was mostly porn and some timeshifting (by the elite crowd that could actually figure out how to program their VCRs.)
Other examples: pay-per-view first emerged so that people could buy porn in hotel rooms. Subscription sites. Affiliate marketing. Webcams.
And going even further back: paperback books, and even the camera.
There are lots more examples, and lots of scholarly papers on the topic. So Mark should be very enthusiastic about it — maybe even brag about it during his next board meeting
If you don’t like it - you can move to China (or Australia).
You’ll be welcomed with open arms in Chinalia!
Andreesen would love it if Zango unleashed a worm on Ning.
The overwhelming yes in the poll must mean something! Give the people what they want… don’t let the few loud ones tear down the freedom.
Truth is always in the hands of the [selected or not-so-selected] few…
the years have not been kind on andreesen.
nothing wrong with it. Its simply catering to the audience.
—–
http://www.xenbet.com
I support his views on freedom of speech, not on porn. Porn is just something that’s there, if nobody wanted it, it wouldn’t be business, but it is major business.
ahh to see the ugly track suit again first thing in the morning
If Ning wants to be the white label social networking solution for porn, so be it. Good luck with advertisers and investors.
What does Gina think about the whole thing? I think it’s funny that she issued that holier-than-thou broadside against Flux on Techcrunch at the same time that her company was trafficking in porn.
I think Marc Andreesen is absolutely right. You either have freedom of expression or you don’t. If something is illegal then it should be stopped, but one mans morally reprehensible act is another mans religious tenet.
I think people ought to remember when they talk about restricting anyones expression, that it might mean that along the line the expression of their beliefs morals and values might be restricted too…
“Judge not less ye be judged” to quote this old book I read.
Good luck with advertisers and investors.
It’s worked out pretty well for AT&T. Their pay-per-view porn channel was their most profitable cable channel. It was powered by a Boulder company called New Frontier which likewise delivered handsome returns to investors. They ran into some trouble with acquisitions, but that wasn’t because of porn. Just bad business decisions.
Andreessen: “We think a better approach is to let people fundamentally do what they want, as long as it isn’t illegal and doesn’t otherwise violate our terms of service.”
Very well put. Nobody is strapping you into a chair and forcing you to watch porn 24/7. If you don’t like it, don’t watch it. Our society has plenty of controls in place to keep people from accidentally stumbling upon “objectionable content”.
Forcing one’s arbitrary “morality” (read: religious ideals) on others may feel righteous and noble, but it’s fundamentally flawed. It’s basically saying that your morality is somehow more important than the other person’s freedom to choose or express himself.
When in doubt, look at a society like China and the many blessings they see from their completely totalitarian control of porn, free expression, etc. Perhaps that makes it easier to understand the appeal of the “freedom to choose as long as you don’t harm others” approach?
I’d be okay with banishing porn as long as we also banished religion and taxes on the same day.
So if you don’t agree with Ning’s policy on porn, you’re a zealot? Glad we’re keeping this discussion even and unbiased.
of course there is no problem with ning hosting porn, but it also indicates they may be slumming it for traffic. the porn biz has incredible traffic churn, and to date is low margin. ning will need more than t&a to make an exit
For those of you that think porn is a free act of expressing yourself, you are seriously ignorant about the sex trade. Many, Many porn “actresses” are drug addicted and abused women working under duress.
Taking a stand against porn is not equatable to taking a stand against religion or taxes. It’s not comparable to limiting someone’s opinion on politics. It doesn’t mean you’re a zealot.
It means you opposed the exploitation of women and children.
Selling it, servicing the industry, and supporting those who promote the degradation and enslavement of women and children is despicable. These people rarely have the ability or chance to say no.
You want to stand up for freedom? Then stand up and say not to the peddlers of child sex and abuse.
Deny it if you want, but visualization inevitably leads to actualization. Porn is the the visual gateway for many sexual predators.
This has nothing to do with religion or free speech.
I think he is right, no doubt this industries need recognition from ICANN too like for xxx tld.
Good porning everbody.
Tom H. Said…
“It means you opposed the exploitation of women and children.”
Oh come on. I’m sure there’s exploitation in the porn business just like every other damn business, but if you think that any more than a token amount of the people making adult films are drug addled women, you’re just buying the b/s put forth by Focus on the Family and others in the fund raising business. Porn is a product like any other, and it will be around a lot longer than the hypocritical morality police filling your head with nonsense.
Oh, and thanks for tossing in the references to exploitation of children and sex abuse… topics with have absolutely nothing to do with the commercial adult film industry. When you can’t win an argument on the merits, make sure you spit out a couple of bromides about “protecting the children.”
Sex is enjoyable and porn can be fun. Get over it already.
It’s now Sept 1, 2008 and I tuned into this link thinking it was current. But since I am here and if anyone ever sees this then my comment on this porn question is this, I have had my fill of those who feel its there duty to remove that which I want to see. Its the nut jobs of the moral majority, you know the ones who violate every attribute they claim to hold up then cry while confessing and hope the other nuts give in and pardon them as if that had any meaning. They obviously don’t believe their own rhetoric or they would live as if they were really afraid of not going to heaven. So they can lie, cheat and steal but suck money out of others and make an easy living, do as they wish in private and don’t much care secretly since they know there is no consequence to any of it. The lemmings who follow feel more pious if they go out and bring Christ to the world and unasked at that. They and their views are no more important than any other and they sure spend a large amount of time thinking about on line sex, if normal don’t you forget about what you don’t like? If normal do yoiu spend all your timr thinking about people or places or even food that you hate? Of course not but then most of us are normal. Needing to havfe approval by some mysterious force for every action you take is rediculous. Thanking some invisible source for everything you have and do, eat, but not every breath and that is far more important and other than Martin Luther do they each says thanks for evfery bowel movement, orgasm, or pee they take too? So why76 the thanks when you eat but not eliminate? People get up early to study this day after day after day. Accept it and live your life. Does it not seem odd that whatever this god business is about at its head is something with an ego so huge it demands thanks for everything? Sounds silly to me. If he made us, leave instructions and back off, you must have other things to do. Try creating tolerance, lack of racist thinking, and end to the horrible things done to children every day, the hunger the fires, being blown up. No that we get responsibility for. But he gets it for the eats. Nice work if you can get it. And while far from finished therein is our lesson for today. It ends with give me a break. Life ends and this makes you think it does not, well that was fine and its also a great way to control others especially women, notice the respect god has everyone paying to them, hey you females you do the shit work and do as you are told, by the males. And they say there is no proof that man made this up! All the way from the USA.