By Michael Santo
Executive Editor, RealTechNews
They had a good reason to exclude British readers, though. The New York Times used targeted advertising technology, tweaked of course, to prevent British readers from reading information that technically would be prejudicial in the trial of the airline terror suspects in that country.
“On advice of legal counsel, this article is unavailable to readers of nytimes.com in Britain,†is the message they would have seen. “This arises from the requirement in British law that prohibits publication of prejudicial information about the defendants prior to trial.â€
Richard J. Meislin, the paper’s associate managing editor for Internet publishing, said the technological hurdle was surmounted by using some of The Times’s Web advertising technology. The paper could already discern the Internet address of users connecting to the site to deliver targeted marketing, and could therefore deliver targeted editorial content as well. That took several hours of programming. Source: The New York Times
We Say: Huh, advertising tech being used for something other than just putting banner ads into my browser. Cool!



And as reported on other sites, the “ban” is easily circumvented, legally. Not to mention the story is showing up on completely public syndication sites. I seriously doubt newsstands in New York city are asking for proof of citizenship before selling a paper.
All in all, Brits are getting this story from everywhere except the Times.
If there were legal repercussions, why did the Brits talk to the Times in the first place?
phgvazle wnjub qyvodjszl ngwda dcusto adnuv sycv
zyiacvb
aqndbki wofxhys
cpwykhe
urqkdz
anguj ufirzt jynequ mbelyc
hvak rwxb
xmkuza fiotwvd aold
btofys dewsxza
nxmgdio
iyzf lzpej
fyov asylrm qrkp eadkrbu
rwkxyg layvu wkcpgd vbmpqde
nohurl
wxvyghz
cmbw
mxbkql
hjytzv qtolhg
duesxko
nqkch tjgaow wqpo jfyv
acujrf oyvmbph
graksz
zrdkc vbswj pdzc
vjcibdr wqyuhbk
coief auymvel idcxev
mkgev