All the hoopla over the years about Internet pornography. Ha.
Seems like these days, it's all porn, at least to an extent.
I am actually referring to those illustrated links one sees in the right-hand margins, or in the bottom margins, of so many informational websites.
Even the most strait-laced of us are subject to getting a little soft porn on our screens when we surf the Internet for legitimate information. Click on a story that may be about stock prices, Founding Fathers or some other sober subject and along the right or bottom margins will be links to other stories or slide shows that seem like respectable distractions. Unfortunately they reside on websites that trumpet various soft-porn, woman-objectifying links that include photos of cheerleaders who supposedly had R-rated wardrobe malfunctions, or pictorials of the "hottest (insert slang name of female body part here)."
Most of the major news sites are suitably sober, at least visually. But the trouble often lies with those "elsewhere on the Web" or "From Our Partners" or "More Promoted Stories" links ... articles that appear to be serious or have some merit. I seem to get into the most trouble when I go to websites to which I've been directed via a Facebook or Twitter link. Next thing I know, I'm eyeing a come-hither link to some skin-revealing celebrity or another at an awards show. Or an ad for a cancer-curing or blood pressure-lowering food that resembles a body part. (Well, these and the link to the "28 Crazy Tattoos that will blow your mind!," showing the picture of the bald guy with that big, open mouth supposedly tatted atop his pate.)
It's all about advertising dollars, and we've moved into the digital age with it. The eyebrow-raising advertisements no longer appear at the back of some alternative newspaper or magazine, and the scandalous stuff is no longer limited to the scandal sheets. Those refinance your home ads -- the ones bearing images that have nothing to do with refinancing a house -- seem almost quaint in this sea of cyberspace sensory overload, where the serious and the absurd are often tossed together like so many salad ingredients.
Granted, some of the responsibility is on us Internet surfers. We need to be more disciplined, more mindful of avoiding sites that bear the images that disturb or offend us, hard to avoid as they may seem. When we're on the news websites, we need to be more mindful of clicking on links to any "quirky" diversion pieces ... those along the lines of "10 things you're doing wrong in your relationship," "9 Scandalous Dancing With the Stars Romances," "Fifteen celebrities who killed somebody" or "14 horrifying cases of celebrity plastic surgery."
If we're pulled in to clicking on these links, we might well be told that we pretty much deserve to see the link to the weight-loss-supplement ad whose illustration is a skimpily dressed woman phone-photographing herself. Or the link to the pictorial featuring somebody's exposed rear end, usually Kim Kardashian's. (After all, we don't want our boss to walk by and see us inadvertently looking at Kardashian's behind when we truly, truly set out to research top marketing case studies for small businesses. Oh, and don't go checking out any online catalog merchandise you don't want popping up in ads months later.)
Just as I recently had to put a lid on my Facebook news feed surfing, I find I'll have to do the same with my news-story surfing. Gotta put on my side blinders and stick to the stuff I originally came to the website for.
Of course, I typed this right before going from cnn.com to a slide show about an airplane graveyard, which connects me to a site where the slide show is dwarfed by Kardashian and the cheerleaders.
Makes ya want to go Amish ... as you hope you don't come across an illustrated "10 hot Amish babes" link.
Stay out of trouble! Email:
hwilliams@arkansasonline.com
Style on 04/19/2015