Would Scientific American run an ad for a stem cell clinic?
What a strange Internet world we live in these days, huh?
Leigh Turner and I just published a piece in Cell Stem Cell on the state of the US stem cell clinic market finding 570 clinics and this paper has drawn a lot of media attention including a piece in Scientific American (Sciam).
I’m glancing over that Sciam article just now and BOOM I see an ad for a stem cell clinic appear at the top and it is even one of the ones in the database we created for our article. The ad is focused on selling stem cells to treat autism in children, an area that raises a lot of questions.
How can it be a good thing to have an ad for a stem cell clinic right next to the article about the challenge of stem cell clinics in America? The way the web works these days, perhaps it isn’t so surprising that articles having anything to do with stem cells will often be accompanied by ads for stem cell clinics. This one just really stuck out to me today because of the context.
Hmm content based ad rendering.
Perhaps its about time to get the ad distribution networks like Google’s Adsense to start blacklisting the fraudulent clinics?
And who gets to make the determination of what constitutes a “fraudulent” clinic? You? @admin? Google?
Paul and Leigh,
I read your article. Why do you list unlike things together and conflate them with broad statements as though all things were the same in some unspecified, hand-waving way?
Your final sentence would have made an excellent starting point. If ever you feel inclined to take your own advice, I’d be inclined to help.
thanks – couldn’t have said it better
Ah, ever more is written, ever more specialization, ever less comprehension. Superficiality is the path most trod.
Irony is the child of context contemplated. It has gone the way of the dodo.
The irony is impressive.
@Jeanne, I know. I was struck by it.
Illustrated one of your points beautifully.