Engaing in Viral Marketing, yea or nay?
March 15, 2005 6:15 PM
Say you've got a political action website that you fund out of your own shallow pockets. Say that in addition to helping bring about what you see as positive political change, one of your motivations is to maybe find a name and/or good job for yourself in the future. Pretend it's successful, but in intangible ways. You're still poor and still hope to someday get out of your dreary 8-5 shit job. Say your site got noticed by the right people and is having the sort of effect you wanted it to, but you have a decision to make...
Now say that a very big consulting firm with very big clients calls you up (out of the blue) and asks you to help them with a viral marketing campaign for a Fortune 500 company. It's still for a cause you believe in -- very much so. But. It's. A. Viral. Marketing. Campaign.... One that could really help your financial situation.
The money thing is a no-brainer, but you're a little concerned that down the line someone will throw the bad netiquette back in your face, and the very community you're trying to cultivate will turn against you.
What do you do? Do you accept the consulting offer? Or do you take the higher road? Is saying "no" really the higher road?
[posted by jessamyn for a user who wishes to remain anonymous but was in a bit of a hurry]
Now say that a very big consulting firm with very big clients calls you up (out of the blue) and asks you to help them with a viral marketing campaign for a Fortune 500 company. It's still for a cause you believe in -- very much so. But. It's. A. Viral. Marketing. Campaign.... One that could really help your financial situation.
The money thing is a no-brainer, but you're a little concerned that down the line someone will throw the bad netiquette back in your face, and the very community you're trying to cultivate will turn against you.
What do you do? Do you accept the consulting offer? Or do you take the higher road? Is saying "no" really the higher road?
[posted by jessamyn for a user who wishes to remain anonymous but was in a bit of a hurry]
I would think that more info on the 'viral marketing' would be necessary. Truly some viral marketing is more heinous than others. This may be the break you have been waiting for. Based on what you have said you have a way to further advance a cause that you very much believe in. You should owe no explanation to anyone.
This begs the question, if you believe in it is it still viral marketing?
[odinsdream: upgrades have temporarily disabled anonymous question asking but we know have flagging, categories and keywords]
posted by geekyguy at 6:35 PM on March 15, 2005
This begs the question, if you believe in it is it still viral marketing?
[odinsdream: upgrades have temporarily disabled anonymous question asking but we know have flagging, categories and keywords]
posted by geekyguy at 6:35 PM on March 15, 2005
Assuming the viral marketing campaign is run-of-the-mill viral marketing, and it's not spouting Whitehouse talking point on community websites or selling Teh New Crack® to teen mothers, getting paid to put more crap in marketplace can't really be held against you.
posted by McGuillicuddy at 6:36 PM on March 15, 2005
posted by McGuillicuddy at 6:36 PM on March 15, 2005
Take the job! Why is this even a question? :)
Viral Marketing is not all evil - it's simply marketing that is done so well that people will talk about it for whatever reason - and move forward the brand of the client that paid for the campaign.
I'm inferring by your question that your web site may hold a dim view to the client's business direction? What is this 'bad netiquette' that you speak of? I am curious why these two (the web site you carefully nurtured, and the prospective client) need somehow to be reconciled.
It appears to me that you were indeed noticed by the very firm that could help your financial situation. As long as the web site that you run is not in direct moral or business conflict with your future client - take this new project!
posted by seawallrunner at 6:43 PM on March 15, 2005
Viral Marketing is not all evil - it's simply marketing that is done so well that people will talk about it for whatever reason - and move forward the brand of the client that paid for the campaign.
I'm inferring by your question that your web site may hold a dim view to the client's business direction? What is this 'bad netiquette' that you speak of? I am curious why these two (the web site you carefully nurtured, and the prospective client) need somehow to be reconciled.
It appears to me that you were indeed noticed by the very firm that could help your financial situation. As long as the web site that you run is not in direct moral or business conflict with your future client - take this new project!
posted by seawallrunner at 6:43 PM on March 15, 2005
The whole point of "viral" marketing seems to be to convince people that you're supporting a cause / promoting a product because you truly believe in it -- and theta your belief isn't influenced by the money you're getting.
Note the blogosphere's reactions to Armstrong Williams, Michael McManus, Maggie Gallagher, and "Jeff Gannon" -- all of them probably did believe in what they were paid to tell us they believed in, but nobody cared at the end of the day. All the bloggers cared about was the conflict of interest.
How much will this deal cost you in aspersions cast on your integrity? How much of the goodwill and trust you've patiently built up will crumble to dust?
Figure it out, and if you still want to go forward, quote the Fortune 500 company a price that takes into account that, in all likelihood, you'll be able to do only this one viral campaign before your name is mud.
posted by orthogonality at 6:48 PM on March 15, 2005
Note the blogosphere's reactions to Armstrong Williams, Michael McManus, Maggie Gallagher, and "Jeff Gannon" -- all of them probably did believe in what they were paid to tell us they believed in, but nobody cared at the end of the day. All the bloggers cared about was the conflict of interest.
How much will this deal cost you in aspersions cast on your integrity? How much of the goodwill and trust you've patiently built up will crumble to dust?
Figure it out, and if you still want to go forward, quote the Fortune 500 company a price that takes into account that, in all likelihood, you'll be able to do only this one viral campaign before your name is mud.
posted by orthogonality at 6:48 PM on March 15, 2005
I believe the answer really depends on what exactly the "viral marketing" campaign is about. The OP says he runs a political website... so as long as the campaign isn't political, I wouldn't worry.
In other words: "And while you're reading my website, you might wish to enjoy a cool, refreshing Pepsi Blue(tm)" is probably okay. "Have I mentioned yet how evil the new Clean Skies bill is?" is not okay to take money for, even if you believe it.
posted by Justinian at 7:01 PM on March 15, 2005
In other words: "And while you're reading my website, you might wish to enjoy a cool, refreshing Pepsi Blue(tm)" is probably okay. "Have I mentioned yet how evil the new Clean Skies bill is?" is not okay to take money for, even if you believe it.
posted by Justinian at 7:01 PM on March 15, 2005
If you don't do it, you'll probably be pegged a socialist; see also Why I Don't Entirely Hate Online Viral Marketing.
posted by glibhamdreck at 7:05 PM on March 15, 2005
posted by glibhamdreck at 7:05 PM on March 15, 2005
I wouldn't take it--if it's really about the cause, then getting co-opted by a corp won't help i don't think, depending on the cause/action/etc. What orthogonality said--trust is in very short supply lately--why take more away?
posted by amberglow at 7:36 PM on March 15, 2005
posted by amberglow at 7:36 PM on March 15, 2005
I don't like seeing morality questions in askme, but it doesn't stop me from answering them.
Having money > not having money. TAKE THE MONEY.
posted by puke & cry at 7:36 PM on March 15, 2005
Having money > not having money. TAKE THE MONEY.
posted by puke & cry at 7:36 PM on March 15, 2005
I agree with orthogonality , I think it's a slippery slope.
posted by lobstah at 7:37 PM on March 15, 2005
posted by lobstah at 7:37 PM on March 15, 2005
the person has a job, so it's not about the money so much. Has he/she thought about what would happen to the site if it became a "job"?
And who are the "right people" that are noticing it? Is it the corp?
posted by amberglow at 7:39 PM on March 15, 2005
And who are the "right people" that are noticing it? Is it the corp?
posted by amberglow at 7:39 PM on March 15, 2005
1) If you choose to do it, some portion of the community will throw it back in your face, no matter what. To some degree, the amount of flak that's thrown back at you is a function of how sketchy the campaign is, but even with the purest of motives, the online world has a lot of bitter, recriminating folks, and they will hold it against you, just because they can. Period. (I'm not saying that all criticism is automatically invalid, but just that some degree is inevitable.)
That's not great, but I think it does actually help clear things up a bit--if you're going to get flak, you're going to get flak. You're not going to just float off into space off the face of the earth, and you're going to get flak. Why worry about either one?
2) If it's a cause you're genuinely committed to, then not doing anything makes you just the same as everybody else who's sitting on the sidelines. Choosing not to act is its own choice, and it's a measure of how important the cause is to you.
3) Viral marketing isn't intrinsically evil--its moral value is a function of how it's executed. (To me, at least.) There are plenty of "viral marketing" campaigns that are pretty open about the fact that they're a marketing vehicle, and they're just depending on word-of-mouth to spread.
To me, the issue should be a direct function of how much you're deceiving your audience. If you're pretty upfront about introducing a marketing element to your site, then people may not _like_ it, but it's a legitimate thing for you to want to do. Your audience may vote with their feet, but there's not going to be an audience if you go broke or burn out, either.
posted by LairBob at 7:53 PM on March 15, 2005
That's not great, but I think it does actually help clear things up a bit--if you're going to get flak, you're going to get flak. You're not going to just float off into space off the face of the earth, and you're going to get flak. Why worry about either one?
2) If it's a cause you're genuinely committed to, then not doing anything makes you just the same as everybody else who's sitting on the sidelines. Choosing not to act is its own choice, and it's a measure of how important the cause is to you.
3) Viral marketing isn't intrinsically evil--its moral value is a function of how it's executed. (To me, at least.) There are plenty of "viral marketing" campaigns that are pretty open about the fact that they're a marketing vehicle, and they're just depending on word-of-mouth to spread.
To me, the issue should be a direct function of how much you're deceiving your audience. If you're pretty upfront about introducing a marketing element to your site, then people may not _like_ it, but it's a legitimate thing for you to want to do. Your audience may vote with their feet, but there's not going to be an audience if you go broke or burn out, either.
posted by LairBob at 7:53 PM on March 15, 2005
Hey, if you're prepared to live with the Karma, go for it. It'll come 'round back at you, but perhaps in an indirect form. Or perhaps not.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:14 PM on March 15, 2005
posted by five fresh fish at 8:14 PM on March 15, 2005
Really, it comes down to how it makes you feel. If it makes you feel icky, and uncomfortable, as though you are squirming in your own skin...well, then, don't do it.
If, however, you feel comfortable with it, and the money is a relief to you and your cause, then by all means, roll forward.
My question, I guess, is why any company with good intentions would use a viral campaign. That in itself might set off my internal alarm system. Were I a member of a PAC and found out that it was secretly taking money from Company X and providing propaganda-like content in exchange, I would tend to suspect that everything on the site, and everything said by that person was in some way influenced by that propaganda.
I don't think advertising is bad. I don't think accepting ad dollars is bad. But I'm not comfortable with viral campaigns, and it sounds to me as though the questioner isn't particularly comfortable with it either.
posted by dejah420 at 8:51 PM on March 15, 2005
If, however, you feel comfortable with it, and the money is a relief to you and your cause, then by all means, roll forward.
My question, I guess, is why any company with good intentions would use a viral campaign. That in itself might set off my internal alarm system. Were I a member of a PAC and found out that it was secretly taking money from Company X and providing propaganda-like content in exchange, I would tend to suspect that everything on the site, and everything said by that person was in some way influenced by that propaganda.
I don't think advertising is bad. I don't think accepting ad dollars is bad. But I'm not comfortable with viral campaigns, and it sounds to me as though the questioner isn't particularly comfortable with it either.
posted by dejah420 at 8:51 PM on March 15, 2005
There's a fair chance that any Fortune 500 is doing business or partnered with other companies who do things you may not agree with. Have you looked into their practices, clients and customers? Their employee relations? Which candidates and causes they give to? What kinds of suits have they settled over? Who sits on the Board?
I can't tell you what to do, but I would urge you to invest some time in researching your prospective benefactor. And run it by the community you maintain, as others have suggested. If you're forthright and honest with your base, you'll have more of them on your side even if political opponents attempt to use it against you.
posted by trondant at 8:55 PM on March 15, 2005
I can't tell you what to do, but I would urge you to invest some time in researching your prospective benefactor. And run it by the community you maintain, as others have suggested. If you're forthright and honest with your base, you'll have more of them on your side even if political opponents attempt to use it against you.
posted by trondant at 8:55 PM on March 15, 2005
If you don't do it, you'll probably be pegged a socialist
Well, I'm a socialist -- which means I understand that under capitalism, most of us have to sell our labor in order to survive. (Which, stripped of jargon, means sometimes you gotta do what ya gotta do.) We've all got to pay the rent, or need health care for ourselves and our kids, or want to be able to finance the creative labors we're not alienated from, or whatever -- there can be plenty of legitimate reasons to take a less-than-ideal job in less-than-ideologically-pure industries.
Having said that, sometimes the only way you can know if it's truly the right choice is that gut check of how you're going to feel looking at yourself in the mirror each morning as you get ready for work. When I was just out of college, jobless and living with my boyfriend in New York who had just been laid off himself, I landed a publicity/marketing gig that would have made a significant difference financially. But no matter how much I needed the money -- no matter how much my boyfriend essentially demanded I take the job -- at the end of the day there was just no fucking way I was going to accept a paycheck from this man.
Short version: everyone's got a line they won't cross. Imagine getting your first paycheck to see if viral marketing is your line or not.
posted by scody at 9:06 PM on March 15, 2005
Well, I'm a socialist -- which means I understand that under capitalism, most of us have to sell our labor in order to survive. (Which, stripped of jargon, means sometimes you gotta do what ya gotta do.) We've all got to pay the rent, or need health care for ourselves and our kids, or want to be able to finance the creative labors we're not alienated from, or whatever -- there can be plenty of legitimate reasons to take a less-than-ideal job in less-than-ideologically-pure industries.
Having said that, sometimes the only way you can know if it's truly the right choice is that gut check of how you're going to feel looking at yourself in the mirror each morning as you get ready for work. When I was just out of college, jobless and living with my boyfriend in New York who had just been laid off himself, I landed a publicity/marketing gig that would have made a significant difference financially. But no matter how much I needed the money -- no matter how much my boyfriend essentially demanded I take the job -- at the end of the day there was just no fucking way I was going to accept a paycheck from this man.
Short version: everyone's got a line they won't cross. Imagine getting your first paycheck to see if viral marketing is your line or not.
posted by scody at 9:06 PM on March 15, 2005
There's another point to consider here, anonymous: what could you learn from the experience, and how could that knowledge benefit your long-term goals? Could you imagine taking your new-found knowldge of online viral marketing to ensure that your political views are the best-funded participants in the political economy for the next twenty years? What about five?
How much do you know, right now, about American and international online privacy law? How much would you know after the conclusion of this project?
Finally, what if you keep a detailed blog-like journal of the whole experience, but do not publish it. Then, a) the project collapses and is forgotten; b) the project becomes the most transformative marketing event in the history of the intarweb; c) the project is modestly successful but generates a certain amount of backlash.
You write a novel based on the journal, and voila! You have a new creative work based on your experience. You write the movie, and win an Oscar. You plot the most stunningly successful politcial advertising campaign ever. And so on. Or maybe you don the suit and eat the donuts and become a spearcarrier for the next twenty years.
This is a really interesting opportunity, and while the cautions earlier in the thread are not to be dismissed, I strongly suspect the intangible and tangible benefits to you outweigh the risks. Just don't sell out the website, if that's the asset they are after. Offer your brain, not your brand.
posted by mwhybark at 9:30 PM on March 15, 2005
How much do you know, right now, about American and international online privacy law? How much would you know after the conclusion of this project?
Finally, what if you keep a detailed blog-like journal of the whole experience, but do not publish it. Then, a) the project collapses and is forgotten; b) the project becomes the most transformative marketing event in the history of the intarweb; c) the project is modestly successful but generates a certain amount of backlash.
You write a novel based on the journal, and voila! You have a new creative work based on your experience. You write the movie, and win an Oscar. You plot the most stunningly successful politcial advertising campaign ever. And so on. Or maybe you don the suit and eat the donuts and become a spearcarrier for the next twenty years.
This is a really interesting opportunity, and while the cautions earlier in the thread are not to be dismissed, I strongly suspect the intangible and tangible benefits to you outweigh the risks. Just don't sell out the website, if that's the asset they are after. Offer your brain, not your brand.
posted by mwhybark at 9:30 PM on March 15, 2005
Viral marketing can be morally okay (word of mouth) or highly ethically challenged (paying women to go to bars and talk up or otherwise promote a specific liquor). The fact that something may be in a good cause isn't relevant to the ethics of advertising (unless one believes that deception in the marketplace is solely the buyer's problem).
So here's what hasn't been discussed yet (above):
* Is the consulting job going to enable X to quit his/her dreary 8-5 job? (And if not, will the consulting time reduce website time.)
* How likely is it that someone will find out about the consulting work? (It doesn't sound like he/she will be expected to use the polital action website for advertising; how would people learn, otherwise?)
* 60 Minutes test: If everyone knew, how bad would it be? (This is, after all, for a cause that X believes in.)
* Might X tell the consulting firm that he/she will help advise on ethically acceptable viral campaigns (no concealment or whatever), but not otherwise?
posted by WestCoaster at 9:36 PM on March 15, 2005
So here's what hasn't been discussed yet (above):
* Is the consulting job going to enable X to quit his/her dreary 8-5 job? (And if not, will the consulting time reduce website time.)
* How likely is it that someone will find out about the consulting work? (It doesn't sound like he/she will be expected to use the polital action website for advertising; how would people learn, otherwise?)
* 60 Minutes test: If everyone knew, how bad would it be? (This is, after all, for a cause that X believes in.)
* Might X tell the consulting firm that he/she will help advise on ethically acceptable viral campaigns (no concealment or whatever), but not otherwise?
posted by WestCoaster at 9:36 PM on March 15, 2005
Take the job. Don't worry or agonize to death over it. Capitalism, American Dream, Paying the Damn Bills, etc.
posted by Jim Jones at 10:47 PM on March 15, 2005
posted by Jim Jones at 10:47 PM on March 15, 2005
If your readership/extended blog society feels manipulated, there will be repercussions, the effects of which could last quite a long time. There's really not enough information to make a recommendation, but one thought that occurs to me is that you probably know better than they do what will work best without inciting backlash. You are likely the superior expert here, so, I wouldn't hesitate to make a counter-proposal if you have another idea, or a modification of the existing strategy that you think might work better.
Dabitch would be a great person to answer this question, since she is both an advertising professional and a highly ethical bloggertype. If she doesn't catch this thread, it might be worthwhile mailing her.
posted by taz at 11:13 PM on March 15, 2005
Dabitch would be a great person to answer this question, since she is both an advertising professional and a highly ethical bloggertype. If she doesn't catch this thread, it might be worthwhile mailing her.
posted by taz at 11:13 PM on March 15, 2005
Sell yourself to the consulting company as a consultant on Net ethics and etiquette. Insist on your standing within the Web community, which you cannot afford to compromise, and so you'll help them most by telling them the truth about their plans. Point out to them that many viral campaigns backfire and cause the advertiser to become an object of ridicule on the Net (e.g., Pepsi Blue).
If they go ahead with their evil plans despite your advice, you can get paid for your consulting work and still sleep at night. If they listen to you and do something honest, you can implement it on your site.
posted by fuzz at 4:09 AM on March 16, 2005
If they go ahead with their evil plans despite your advice, you can get paid for your consulting work and still sleep at night. If they listen to you and do something honest, you can implement it on your site.
posted by fuzz at 4:09 AM on March 16, 2005
Agreed that without specifics about the *kind* of "viral. marketing. campaign." it is, I'm at a loss to give good advice here. But at first glance, I really like fuzz's idea as a way to straddle the issue in a thoughtful way.
posted by mediareport at 5:12 AM on March 16, 2005
posted by mediareport at 5:12 AM on March 16, 2005
Viral marketing is just another form of advertising. If you think advertising is a sin, don't do it. Otherwise, have them SHOW YOU THE MONEY.
posted by signal at 6:26 AM on March 16, 2005
posted by signal at 6:26 AM on March 16, 2005
Viral Marketing is not all evil - it's simply marketing that is done so well that people will talk about it for whatever reason - and move forward the brand of the client that paid for the campaign.
You must work in advertising.
It's one thing to say "I'm Jessamyn and this company, whose products I use anyway, paid me to tell you about their products." It's a whole 'nother thing to start slipping in purchased adulations about products (whether you use the products or not). The reason people trust you is because they think they know you and that they think you have integrity. If you start getting paid for that integrity under the table then there's no way anyone should ever trust you again.
Pardon the rambling, I'm on cold medicine (NyQuil, for all your stuffy, sneezing...)
posted by bshort at 8:30 AM on March 16, 2005
You must work in advertising.
It's one thing to say "I'm Jessamyn and this company, whose products I use anyway, paid me to tell you about their products." It's a whole 'nother thing to start slipping in purchased adulations about products (whether you use the products or not). The reason people trust you is because they think they know you and that they think you have integrity. If you start getting paid for that integrity under the table then there's no way anyone should ever trust you again.
Pardon the rambling, I'm on cold medicine (NyQuil, for all your stuffy, sneezing...)
posted by bshort at 8:30 AM on March 16, 2005
I say take the damn money. It's a cause you believe in. You're not evil. You're not anywhere close to evil. You'll be helping a cause you believe in and getting paid for it.
Besides, they're paying you for your expertise. Ostensibly, you would know if this viral marketing gig would kill the community you're trying to cultivate. You're the expert.
posted by sachinag at 8:36 AM on March 16, 2005
Besides, they're paying you for your expertise. Ostensibly, you would know if this viral marketing gig would kill the community you're trying to cultivate. You're the expert.
posted by sachinag at 8:36 AM on March 16, 2005
Puzzles:
What does the consulting company want Activist X to do? Some people (myself included, prior comment) have talked about "consulting work" (because the phrase "consulting offer" was used), but it's not at all clear that this is what Activist X is to be paid for. Rereading the question (in particular, "bad netiquette"), it seems possible that the consulting company wants to use the political action website to push a particular view (for example, not to build a LNG terminal) that would benefit a Fortune 500 company (for example, a competitor of the company proposing the LNG terminal). In other words, perhaps this is a proposal for pseudo-astroturfing?
What does a political action website have to do with a viral marketing campaign? Put differently, viral marketing normally means consumer purchases; political action means lobbying and voting. And if the two are unrelated, why has Activist X been approached to consult about viral advertising? It's not because of the expertise from his/her "shit job", obviously. And as well written as the political action site may be, it isn't obvious that this qualifies someone to help with marketing of a consumer product. That the marketing campaign is "for a cause that" Activist X "believes in" seems to argue that the viral marketing isn't consumer-oriented - is there a labeling problem here?
What exactly is the "bad netiquette" here? Taking money from a big corporation (which, probably, few of us would have problems with, in and of itself)? Or doing so secretly, as with Armstrong Williams?
In short, it's difficult to offer advice without knowing what is really at issue. Having said that, if the proposal is to use the political action site to flog a particular point of view (a view supported by Activist X) in exchange for much money, and to not disclose such payments -- if that is indeed the proposal, then it seems reprehensible. Unless, of course, one believes that the more money a corporation has, the more speech it should be able to buy, including speech that appears to come from disinterested parties.
posted by WestCoaster at 9:28 AM on March 16, 2005
What does the consulting company want Activist X to do? Some people (myself included, prior comment) have talked about "consulting work" (because the phrase "consulting offer" was used), but it's not at all clear that this is what Activist X is to be paid for. Rereading the question (in particular, "bad netiquette"), it seems possible that the consulting company wants to use the political action website to push a particular view (for example, not to build a LNG terminal) that would benefit a Fortune 500 company (for example, a competitor of the company proposing the LNG terminal). In other words, perhaps this is a proposal for pseudo-astroturfing?
What does a political action website have to do with a viral marketing campaign? Put differently, viral marketing normally means consumer purchases; political action means lobbying and voting. And if the two are unrelated, why has Activist X been approached to consult about viral advertising? It's not because of the expertise from his/her "shit job", obviously. And as well written as the political action site may be, it isn't obvious that this qualifies someone to help with marketing of a consumer product. That the marketing campaign is "for a cause that" Activist X "believes in" seems to argue that the viral marketing isn't consumer-oriented - is there a labeling problem here?
What exactly is the "bad netiquette" here? Taking money from a big corporation (which, probably, few of us would have problems with, in and of itself)? Or doing so secretly, as with Armstrong Williams?
In short, it's difficult to offer advice without knowing what is really at issue. Having said that, if the proposal is to use the political action site to flog a particular point of view (a view supported by Activist X) in exchange for much money, and to not disclose such payments -- if that is indeed the proposal, then it seems reprehensible. Unless, of course, one believes that the more money a corporation has, the more speech it should be able to buy, including speech that appears to come from disinterested parties.
posted by WestCoaster at 9:28 AM on March 16, 2005
This thread is closed to new comments.
I'm a musician. I consider myself to be exceptionally creative. I also work a shit job. I would gladly record a generic crap pop album for the sole purpose of generating the funds to allow me to pursue my true creative endeavors full time.
If this consulting job can help you financially so that you can focus on your true goals, how is that bad? (I also think it's a good response to anyone who would throw that in your face). Integrity is a good thing. But sometimes you need a little reality too.
Can a little evil help you sow a lot of good? I think so.
posted by zerokey at 6:34 PM on March 15, 2005