Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Advertising Social Networks Communications Software The Internet Technology

Snapchat Wanted $150K To Not Run NRA Ads On Gun Control Group Videos ( 377

New submitter bababoris writes: It appears that Snapchat's Rob Saliterman attempted to "encourage" Everytown for Gun Safety to advertise with Snapchat or risk having National Rifle Association (NRA) ads run during their Live Story promoting gun safety. The Next Web reports: "Everytown for Gun Safety is an advocacy group that focuses on gun safety and violence issues. According to Mic, it reached out to Snapchat in 2016 to inquire about an advertising campaign for its #WearOrange event, held on National Gun Violence Awareness Day. A Snapchat representative, Rob Saliterman, responded to Everytown with a quote of $150,000. This would allow Snapchat users to engage with the event using custom filters and lenses created specifically for it. Realizing that another department within Snapchat had undercut him, he fired off an email suggesting that Everytown pay up, lest National Rifle Association (NRA) adverts appear on their videos."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Snapchat Wanted $150K To Not Run NRA Ads On Gun Control Group Videos

Comments Filter:
  • by nyet ( 19118 ) on Friday March 03, 2017 @10:12PM (#53973621) Homepage

    Everytown for Gun Safety has no interest whatsoever in "gun safety".

    • by cfalcon ( 779563 )

      > Everytown for Gun Safety has no interest whatsoever in "gun safety".

      No, they're just another bunch of gun grabbing tyrants.

      But, the topic isn't about them, and how much they suck. It's about whether it is at all ok for Snapchat to basically try to extort them by asking for cash or threatening to play a countermessage.

      It's phrased cleverly enough to avoid any legal issues, probably- they simply mention that the NRA is talking about buying advertisement time- but that is clearly meant as a threat.


    • For those of us who aren't familiar with this group, could you provide a citation or at least some explanation? I mean I know slashdot is getting more and more right wing, but I think at least pretending that anti-gun groups aren't inherently something we hate would be good.
      • by Bartles ( 1198017 ) on Saturday March 04, 2017 @12:40AM (#53974211)

        Just google "everytown false". Slashdot is not getting more right wing, it is getting more liberal in the classical sense. It's your relative point of view that has changed.

  • has its own protection racket. so does snapchat
  • Honestly? I'm curious whether they violated any of their own terms by deliberately soliciting bids to bump the NRA from their ad slot.
  • With Snapchat lenses?

    I can see how this could really go wrong. []

  • by Onuma ( 947856 ) on Friday March 03, 2017 @11:39PM (#53973965)

    The NRA is a deeply controversial and polarizing gun advocacy group. While some argue that it exists to vigorously defend the Second Amendment, others argue that the NRA has stifled any meaningful attempt at reasonable gun control reform.

    Can't both arguments have merit, simultaneously?
    What is the metric for whether a proposed gun control measure is "reasonable"? That is a highly subjective term.

    Furthermore, what is the standard rate for this type of advertisement? Is $150k USD the going rate for 3x 10-second ads for an event of this nature, or is the price here being inflated simply due the diametric natures of Everytown and the NRA?

    I do like how Mic (who originally received the emails regarding this story) fails to address these questions entirely. Mic is garbage, as is TheNextWeb for running a [basically paraphrased, rehashed] story without asking pertinent questions.

    • The most immoral act it seems was to sell ad space to the NRA, who represent about half of the households in the US (45 million households own firearms) and then turn around and try to stifle their voice by offering to kill the ads for a fee. I am pretty certain that this would have been illegal if it were radio or broadcast TV airtime because of the rules around selling ad space.

      If the position of Everytown is well reasoned and sourced, it seems that the NRA adds should be welcome, seeing as the NRA is es

    • The US uses a precedent-based court system. It's a pretty good system in most aspects, but one drawback is that it tends to polarise political issues because of a fear of incrimentalism. The NRA is obliged to oppose any form of gun control, no matter how reasonable, because once courts say that much gun control is allowable it becomes a great deal easier to then pass stricter gun control, and even stricter after that. The same thing goes on regarding abortion: Even pro-choice activists rarely support full a

      • by swb ( 14022 )

        The Supreme Court is also part of the problem. The stability of the court is both a benefit and a curse. It's a curse because once appointed, justices serve for life which means the court is glacially slow to turn over. In most cases, the only way to change a Supreme Court ruling is to either pass a constitutional amendment or appoint new justices with predictable ideological biases who then overrule past rulings.

        Since amending the constitution is practically impossible, partisans have realized that by l

        • There's another consequence of the stability of surpreme court decisions too: It leads to a lot of indirect laws, where legislators try to find creative ways to achieve indirectly things that they cannot achieve directly under the constitution as interpreted by the supreme court. This often leads to some really strange and convoluted laws, including laws that are intentionally impossible to comply with.

    • by rossz ( 67331 )

      the NRA has stifled any meaningful attempt at reasonable gun control reform.

      The anti-gun crowd keeps changing the definition of "reasonable gun control". At one time the NRA backed extensive gun control laws and those laws passed. Then the anti-gun people moved the goal post. They keep moving the goal post. So the NRA finally said "enough is enough".

  • Everytown for Gun Safety's first mistake: Snapchat.
  • Either they start taking political positions, or money talks. Gun ownership is legal. So this isn't about a corporation making money off of illegal activity. If you think it's immoral, then you can't expect them to pay for your moral judgements. Otherwise, you should expect them to take a moral stand of their choosing on any issue you may disagree with.

If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants. -- Isaac Newton