Let’s see, you like being read! So you use the Times Union forum – it is not the candidate’s fault they are on your blog, it’s your hosts – point your finger where in the direction where it should go.

It had to be fast because I was so furious . . . and, frankly, I’m still pretty steamed about it.

Community bloggers ARE different from paid reporters and columnists. We’re closer to the folks who write letters to the editor, which run on the (advert-free) editorial pages than we are to anything else in the print paper.

I understand the economics of the model, and I have accepted commercial adverts on my page as a necessary evil to support that model, but I believe that political advertising is a radically different beast, and shouldn’t be treated the same ways that tire commercials are.

Again, I’m probably wrong, naive, over-sensitive, cranky, whatever about that . . . but I felt absolutely violated in having my personal blog turned into a campaign advertisement, first and most obviously for Doyle, though now I see other candidates appearing as well.

So I appreciate your continued meetings with advertising. I think it’s important that as this enterprise goes forward. I’m hopeful that I’ll return to posting here after election season ends, but to some extent, that will hinge on how advertising responds to the concerns you are carrying to them. I’ll be watching closely and with great interest accordingly.

Since Kevin’s post has little to do with the differences I see between Eric and myself, I’m moving my comments over there.

In the mean time, since I’ll serve a contra-point the Eric as far as candidates go: http://www.albanycitizenone.com/2010/09/surrogate-court-forum-over-at-apl.html

Bon Appetite.

Unless you’re living under a rock, you know the newspaper in, dustry has been decimated by declining numbers for both circulation and advertising. At the same time, readers expect to get their online news, and news Web sites, for free. Uh-oh. So who’s gonna pay for the Web site? Advertisers. While many readers view ads as intrusive annoyances, I see them and say, gee, thanks, Mr. Advertiser, for helping pay our bills and keeping me and my colleagues employed.

With regard to political ads, the advertiser (possibly the campaign manager) signed up for a ‘run of site’ ad buy, which means we promise to deliver an agreed-upon number of page views by a set date (next Tuesday, I think). That’s why you see Cathryn Doyle’s ads all over our site. The ads are displayed wherever we have open inventory to meet the magic number of impressions.

This is old news: We’ve had political ads on our blogs for years. And being a TU blogger has always been a compromise: you get some benefit (an audience) at some cost (it’s an advertising-supported site).

I think most readers clearly separate content from ads. No one holds a reporter/columnist responsible for the advertisers that wrap around his/her copy. I spoke to a Tea Party blogger today and he said his free blog (not on the TU platform) occasionally displays ads for Barbara Boxer!

I wish we could have come to some agreement on this content vs. ad issue before Eric’s fast and furious departure. I’ll continue to meet with Advertising to work toward an understanding of what’s best for our readers, advertisers and bloggers.

I have the highest regard for J. Eric Smith. He is a man of integrity and he is a brilliant writer. He volunteered to blog on timesunion.com for the past four years. He gave us lots of stories and poetry. We gave him lots of visibility and readers. It’s a trade that benefited both Eric and the TU. He moves on. We move on. I wish him much success. Sad to see him go.

PS. When I run for office, I’m hiring Kevin Marshall as my dirty campaign consultant.

So, you know, experienced, fair, and compassionate are nice . . . but is that the whole story?

That’s why I don’t want that paid political crap on pages that I write.