Quote:
Originally Posted by HamsterWheel
Apparently they paid for the space, then put adverts for charities on the bits they didn't use for Phorm, so the charities got some free adverts.
Which is apparently why Alex was happy to withdraw his accusations.
So far from stealing ads from charities, they bought them some.
I'm sure Alex will correct me if I am wrong.
|
Firstly - this chat is nothing to do with Alex, and if you continue to reference Alex I will recommend that he files a suit against you for Defam and Slander. Its you and I homie!!
Secondly, looking at the workings, as described by BT, it appears that the advertising space was bought by Phorm to replace the Charities ads.
This was no doubt a vain attempt to gain public trust, as they would be seen to be working with Charities - but I can assure you THIS IS NOT working with Charities.
The point of a Charity is to give; not to take. If the description BT have given is correct, then Phorm approached the Charities with a Commercial Offer, which is NOT CHARITABLE - it is business.
If they wanted to appear to be CHARITABLE, they should have donated to the Charity; bought space from other advertisers - and then advertised the Charities.
@BT and Phorm: This is based on your description. If the interpretation is incorrect, it is due to your incompentance when writing, and subsequently allowing the leak of the report. YOUR OWN RESPONSIBLITY - YOUR OWN FALIBILTY - YOUR PROBLEM. TRY SUE ME...
(B4 complaint: Homie is reference to Homeboy - USA Slang term)