Catoblepas

joined 2 years ago
[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

It comes across like you feel we can't protect gay/minority children from being exploited by huge corporations online because it would be homophobic to protect gay kids from psychological manipulation.

This is some weird ass fanfic you are writing about me for asking how the researchers came to their conclusions about LGBT ads, specifically, being judged to be inappropriate. I’m not engaging with this anymore.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

You’re classifying all of these as malicious by virtue of being ads, which the researchers obviously didn’t. Take that up with them.

I question the idea that the reason these were classified as inappropriate was because of sexual pop ups. If that was the case than many innocuous sites with crappy ad practices would have also made it onto the list.

Knowing that queer people exist and that you could be queer isn’t “sexual advertisement,” by the way. Which is why I wanted to know more about how the researchers came to the conclusion that these particular ads were inappropriate.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 months ago (12 children)

Adding an “are you gay?” quiz to the list of inappropriate ads shown to children immediately makes me question the researcher biases and methodology. Unless those have gotten WAY spicier since I was a kid, I remember passing so many quizzes like that around with my friends at that age.

How many ads related to heterosexuality were classified as appropriate? How does that compare to their classification of LGBT ads?