Want to know my favorite domain registrar?
 

Affiliate Marketing Blog by Shawn Collins

Affiliate Marketing Blog by Shawn Collins random header image
← Affiliate Programs 101: A Beginner’s Course Affiliate Marketing Cribs: Shawn Collins →

Bottom Feeder Affiliate Monetizes Virginia Tech Shootings

April 17th, 2007 · Comments

Thanks for visiting the Affiliate Tip blog. Subscribe to my RSS feed or enter your e-mail on the top right to get updates by e-mail.

On April 16, 2007, a lone gunman killed 33 people at Virginia Tech. It was a horrible tragedy that tore apart countless families. One affiliate saw an opportunity.

I came across a post on Earners Blog today about an affiliate who launched a site to cash in on the killings.

This character quickly registered a site, vashootings.com, and began publishing details on the shootings.

One of the posts, titled “Our thoughts are with the people in VA Tech” had the following message:

Send flowers to the victim’s family and friends in this troubling time. Our thoughts and prayers go out to this college town.

The affiliate’s efforts to make money on the murders include links to From You Flowers, FTD, and Grower Flowers, as well as Google AdSense ads.

I find this to be deplorable - an ugly, pathetic side to affiliate marketing. If I were running one of those affiliate programs, the affiliate’s account would be closed.

Here is administrative contact for the domain:

Hinds, Isaac
LIFT STUDIOS
6380 S. Boston St.
#315
Englewood, Colorado 80111
United States
(303) 908-3998

To quote the U.S. Army’s attorney general, Joseph Welch, during the Army-McCarthy hearing in April 1954, “Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”

Follow Shawn on TwitterFollow Shawn on Twitter.

Tags: Affiliate Opinions

Viewing 30 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    wwaaaaaahh. you don't think every news outlet in the country is profiting from this horrible event? leave this guy be.
    • ^
    • v
    wwaaaaaahh. you don’t think every news outlet in the country is profiting from this horrible event? leave this guy be.


    No, I won't leave him alone, because I think he's a dreg of the affiliate marketing space.

    Just because somebody else is profiting off depravity doesn't make it right.
    • ^
    • v
    Update... the flower merchants and Google AdSense units have been removed from the affiliate's site.
    • ^
    • v
    There's also a note that all proceeds from the site will be donated to the victims' fund. I imagine he got a fair bit of heat over it and pulled the ads then donated the money.

    I have to agree with the first post to a certain degree though. The news outlets are no doubt profiting from this. I don't bother watching CNN but I'm sure they've had nothing but this on for 24 hours now, with ratings much higher than normal. All those viewers get to watch their ads between the same repeated stories hour after hour and I doubt they're donating their profit.

    I'm sure there will be all kinds of stories in the tabloids in the next few days. Probably a movie somewhere down the road. I agree with you that it doesn't make what this guy did right, but I hardly think he should be singled out. If you're going to condemn profiting from these people's pain, you should include all those who are doing so. He's really no worse than any of the others (no better either).

    Just my 2 cents...
    • ^
    • v
    If you’re going to condemn profiting from these people’s pain, you should include all those who are doing so.


    I don't actually work in television news, so it's doubtful my condemnation of that "if it bleeds, it leads" culture would have much impact.
    • ^
    • v
    I would not consider profiting from such a tragic event – BUT.

    My RANT:

    I would take legal action against all those who pulled my ads and google for not allowing me to profit from an opportunity. Affiliate marketing is no different than paparazzo’s grabbing that disgusting photo of blood running down the body as they pulled him out of the building. Do you really think that photojournalist donated all his profit? NOT!

    To condemn others because you would not profit from a tragedy is forcing others to maintain your moral standards; last I checked that was Communism or a Dictatorship.

    Declaring your standards or disgust of others moral standards is your opportunity to enjoy freedom of speech, this person has the right to enjoy freedom of enterprise and those of you trying to take it away from this person should be ashamed of yourself.
    • ^
    • v
    I would take legal action against all those who pulled my ads and google for not allowing me to profit from an opportunity.


    Have a look at the terms of your agreement first. I've seen plenty that allow merchants to remove affiliates without cause.

    Affiliate marketing is no different than paparazzo’s grabbing that disgusting photo of blood running down the body as they pulled him out of the building.


    I don't agree that affiliate is based on parasitic behavior. Maybe 10% of it, but certainly not the whole industry.

    Declaring your standards or disgust of others moral standards is your opportunity to enjoy freedom of speech, this person has the right to enjoy freedom of enterprise and those of you trying to take it away from this person should be ashamed of yourself.


    This sort of affiliate can do as they please, but I wouldn't want to work with them.

    And I think an association with this sort of behavior would be negative for a brand.

    I am not going to be ashamed for a second for being opposed to those who try to benefit from tragedy.
    • ^
    • v
    Some profiteers of this tragedy:
    News media
    Book deals
    Movie Deals
    Mini Series
    Photojournalist
    Paparazzo
    Scum Magazines
    Reputable Magazines
    Websites
    Blogs - even this one condemning
    Myspace
    And many many more…

    Every one of those avenues will have advertising and an affiliate based link to something.

    ------ This outrage Blog has actually made me mad ------

    I am sick and tired of others outrage stomping on my civil liberties, when does it end?
    Do you not understand the slippery slope outrage is starting?

    Every time you get someone fired, banned or whatever for your moral standards, you are taking another chunk of our FREEDOM.

    I have had about all I can take of others messing with my liberties, what’s next? Because I do not go to your church you want to kill me or reprogram me?

    You may think I am exaggerating things, but it’s not that far a stretch.

    STOP THE PC MACHINE! Enough already.
    • ^
    • v
    I had better add when I use the term "YOUR" its not intended for anyone in particular.
    • ^
    • v
    If I were to choose sides in this, I would tend to side with SandraR.

    Every single news site immediately and automatically switches their ad inventory to run their highest CPM ads as soon as traffic exceeds the norm - many of which also contain pay for performance bonuses.

    Was the floral affiliate ad in bad taste? Probably. Adsense? Not in the least. But guess what, he took the flak and removed the affiliate ad. He also didn't hide behind a whois privacy service.

    You want more issues to fight? Google Virginia Tech. The Washington post is buying adwords touting their coverage of the story. Why isn't there outrage in that direction?

    Monetizing news is the only reason why we have news outlets. CNN, FoxNews, even your local tv news telecast is funded by ad dollars capitalizing on bad news.

    This guy is even following journalistic standards - rewriting the story in his own words and citing sources.
    • ^
    • v
    Do you not understand the slippery slope outrage is starting?


    Let me get this straight - it's bad for me to criticize somebody, because it infringes on their civil liberties?

    So anything goes in marketing, but I should be censored?
    • ^
    • v
    Shawn this is not a personal attack against you, its a rant of current events and the current trend to ban, fire, and even publicly humiliate because someone dares to not share the same moral compass as others.

    I am all for complaining and ranting about others, but to BAN, FIRE, and CLOSE ACCOUNTS due to moral opinion is horrifically frightening. I believe all advertisers have the right to choose what is morally correct for their brand. To have there moral code changed by a few touting this is wrong is even OK by me.

    When it becomes a problem is when advertisers selectively choose who has offended their moral code. I see google adsense all over ever-single news media and numerous blogs, to include sites, which are all heavily advertising on there sites about this tragic event.

    This ONE individual has been chastised because numerous people complained and showed moral outrage and there advertisers pulled their account and google banned them?
    • ^
    • v
    But guess what, he took the flak and removed the affiliate ad.


    So if that statement up on the site now is true - that he is donating all proceeds to the victims, I have to wonder why he ever took the ads down?

    On the day of the shootings, the message in the same spot was simply:

    About VAshootings.com
    This blog is devoted to the ongoing coverage of the Virginia Tech shootings that the took place on April 16, 2007.

    Yesterday, after the criticism, the proceeds were now going to go to the "victim's fund".
    • ^
    • v
    It's very clear in this thread who the libs and who the cons are. :-\

    So if I have a porn site and I want to run Adsense and FTD ads but they don't want the ads to appear, I have the right to sue them? Give me a break. These companies have the right to determine where THEIR (not the capitalized word) ads appear.

    And I love the talk of civil liberties with no mention of ethics beyond, "hey, someone else is profiting from this so why can't I?"

    Vic
    • ^
    • v
    i agree with the first comment that many people will "cashing in" on this horrific event and i don't think those cashing in are limited to internet marketers.

    from financial to political gain, lots of people will cash in.

    with that said, Shawn i understand your passion and annoyance, so you do what you must.
    • ^
    • v
    @Shawn
    I didn't catch the change in the About content. But it doesn't materially change my main point which is that one individual shouldn't be singled out for following the same business model that every mainstream news organization in the US follows.

    @Vic
    I agree, this isn't about civil liberties as they apply from the government to the people. Every single affiliate program has every right to suspend/end/modify the business relationship with their affiliates if they have a problem with the methods. At the end of the day, they have to answer to their advertisers, period.

    Now on the eroding civil liberties in this country post-9/11, even as a conservative, I will fight tooth and nail to preserve my freedoms. I have some contention with my party over the environment as well, but that is another story.

    Just don't call me a lib :)
    • ^
    • v
    Has anyone even emailed this guy for his side of the story?
    • ^
    • v
    Someone called ME A LIB?
    Could not stop laughing long enough to reply.

    I called this person and was impressed with his business model, the whole story was not told on this issue. Shawn you may want to give him a ring and get his side of the story.
    • ^
    • v
    Heh, sorry to bring labels into it. :-D

    The only possible way I would cut this guy slack is if a significant portion of the affiliate income was going to the families of those killed.

    Vic
    • ^
    • v
    ...one individual shouldn’t be singled out for following the same business model that every mainstream news organization in the US follows.


    Hey Steve -

    I disagree - he's using the information that news organizations are spending money to create.

    He's not breaking any news. He's piggybacking. That's hardly the same business model as the actual news organizations.
    • ^
    • v