Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Yet another inconvenience because of greed. I can't check my email thanks to Gwen Stefani.

Posted 6 years ago on Dec. 9, 2014, 9:44 p.m. EST by StillModestCapitalist (343)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Gwen Stefani is already worth over $100,000,000. Far more than the average 1% pig net worth of $16,000,000. Still she wants more. Aside from the hardship, poverty, and economic instability she causes by concentrating far too much wealth, she has gone out of her way to inconvenience millions by placing an ad which literally prevents them from checking their email. It's the type of ad that you simply can not close no matter how carefully or how many times you try. When you attempt to do so, it enlarges covering the 'login' button making it impossible to check your email.

I am one of many being inconvenienced at this time. Fortunately, it's not vital that I check my email tonight. I can simply wait for the ad to expire or it's function to alter. But others are surely being inconvenienced more seriously as we type. Some may be checking for a job offer. Some may be hoping for a response in order to sell a used car. Some may be trying to get in touch with a loved one. Like me, these people weren't given any advance notice. They weren't given the opportunity to plan for this inconvenience. They are simply out of luck at this time.

The point is this: It should be illegal to place these sorts of ads that can't be closed. It is certainly immoral to place any ad which interferes with normal function of email service on any device. Ordinary (decent) people should not be inconvenienced by filthy-disgusting-rich 1% club pigs hell-bent on concentrating more wealth. It's just plain wrong.

By the way, that filthy-disgusting-rich 1% pig Gwen Stefani has cut a deal with Apple and Mastercard in which she gets even richer by helping to convince ordinary (decent) people to go further into debt by using their credit cards and cellular pay services. This effectively cuts labor from the finance industry thereby downsizing the workforce and making the middle class even weaker than they already are.

None of it matters to Gwen Stefani. SHE WANTS MORE.

The hell with Gwen Stefani. Don't buy any of her overpriced crap.

And don't fall for her FAKE humanitarian crap either. It's become utterly predictable. Celebrities often arrange it in order to coincide with their own commercial promotions.



Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by JPB950 (2254) 6 years ago

The problem isn't Stefani or the celebrities like her, it's those of us that are too lazy or uneducated to know who to listen to. I can open two windows on my computer and let an ad run out in one while doing something else in another. There isn't a lot i can do to educate the public that a celebrity isn't a financial guru, medical expert, or scientist.

Not much can be done to stop celebrities, too many people think they have some kind or relevance. I can't even get too worked up over their obscene wealth. The public voluntarily makes celebrities wealthy and worse believes talent in one area somehow translates into having knowledge in all areas. Unfortunately the public has a problem with ignorance.

[-] 0 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

The problem is everyone and everything that concentrate too much wealth. The motive is greed.

Gwen Stefani is not some uninformed little twit like Paris Hilton. She is business savvy and calculated. Right down to a half dozen or more facial expressions that she crafted years ago while standing in front of a mirror.

When I stated that she placed the ad, I meant that she did so by making the deal. Not by writing and submitting the code. It's her product with her name and her image in the ad. She is surely aware of it's place and function. Therefore, she is responsible for it. Just like I would be if I hired a kid to place ads for my product on every car in a parking lot.

I don't know how many areas Gwen Stefani is knowledgeable in but she is surely knowledgeable in business and PR.

She could learn a thing or two about morality.

[-] 6 points by JPB950 (2254) 6 years ago

I don't disagree with you, but I see the problem is much more then just wealth concentration. The vast majority of the public doesn't take action, so the problem will never go away. I don't see Stefani, any celebrity, or even any mega-rich individual as much more then a symptom.

We vote for the people that make the laws that permit vast accumulations of wealth. We will choose the corrupt official that promises to address our fears or the corrupt official that promises to give us something. Instead of staying informed and refusing to vote for the corrupt. We have a system of laws that permit wealth and the majority don't have the resolve to change it.

[-] 3 points by MattHolck0 (3867) 6 years ago

wealth is created through loans to banks that produce free money from their loans to the populous

[-] 1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

Our views are not identical but they do overlap heavily. Thanks for the input.

[-] 1 points by turbocharger (1756) 6 years ago

Excellent points

[-] 2 points by flip (7101) 6 years ago

you never responded to my point about honest disagreement - what's up with that? and i assume you will agree that wealth concentration was much less bad in 1965 and still decreasing. while the wealth was more equitably distributed we were still bombing the world. inequality cannot be the only issue we focus on - right?

[-] -2 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

It's not the occasional disagreements that I take notice of. It's the utter predictability of several users, including you of ripping on electable Democrats in particular when complaining about the government.

Of course things were better in 1965. They were much better primarily because of the progressive tax structure and more responsible behavior on the part of consumers.

Of course, there are multiple issues to address. But the COW underscores virtually all of them.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 6 years ago

ok, now please address the issue of war and military spending - does it concern you that we have 1000 bases around the world - and growing rapidly under your democrat. does it bother you that we are killing people every day with drones and kill teams. what does the cow have to do with that??

[-] -1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

The global and regional COW has everything to do with the relations of people and countries all over the world.

Extreme wealth makes world prosperity physically and mathematically impossible. Without world prosperity, there will never be world peace or anything even close.

Regarding the use of drones and collateral damage: I don't know where the line should be drawn but if we do nothing terrorism goes unchecked. If we do too much, more terrorists are born. Personally, I believe that we should fight as smart and effective as possible but also as accurate as possible in order to keep collateral damage to a minimum. I also believe that we should set the example and stop torturing prisoners.

[-] 4 points by flip (7101) 6 years ago

oh my god - on ows and for drones and 1000 bases around the world - come on man! do you understand the military industrial complex - do you know why we need enemies? against torture - great - holy shit what have we come to. fight smart - do you not know how the empire works??

[-] -1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

I am sure as HOLY HELL not 'for' US military bases all over the world. Not 1000, 100 or even 1 outside of our own borders. I believe it to be a sick, excessive, disgusting, and totally unnecessary display of power, corruption and influence. I'm all for working with other governments but not against them or without their permission except under the most extreme circumstances when war has been declared on us. Either by a government entity or terrorist organization.

Damn right I'm aware of the military industrial complex. It has already inspired and corrupted a number of military operations. It has caused tens or hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths at the very least. It has made us more hated around the world and for reasons that are sometimes legitimate. It has resulted in the deaths of thousands of soldiers, many of whom didn't realize that they were being sent to fight for the profit of corporations (primarily by securing oil reserves at no cost whatsoever to the industry). It has resulted in the maiming of tens of thousands of soldiers who also didn't realize that corporate profits in America are considered more important than the lives and limbs of soldiers.

Damn right I'm aware of it. Damn right I'm disgusted. But I was in a hurry earlier and forgot to address the issue.

I'm against most wars and against most military operations but I do believe that some are necessary (Afghanistan) and that there is never a perfect military strategy. There is always an ugly downside. That's what I meant by fight smart, effective, and accurate.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 6 years ago

ok thanks for that - we disagree on afghanistan - it is time we join the community of nations and behave properly. we are still the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today

[-] -1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

I see. It's ok for others to complain about the MIC but my comment is marked down simply because I don't blame Democrats IN PARTICULAR.

How predictable.

[-] 2 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

By the way, that filthy-disgusting-rich 1% pig Gwen Stefani has cut a deal with Apple and Mastercard in which she gets even richer by helping to convince ordinary (decent) people to go further into debt by using their credit cards and cellular pay services. This effectively cuts labor from the finance industry thereby downsizing the workforce and making the middle class even weaker than they already are.

None of it matters to Gwen Stefani. SHE WANTS MORE.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago

Have you gotten down on Samuel L. Jackson (the Capitol One Credit Card Pimp) Yet?

[-] 1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

No but I've seen the commercials. These people have no conscience.

The masses would be far better off paying by cash or check saving their credit cards for emergencies only.

Then again, consumer debt is very profitable for the industry and those who endorse it.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago

Seriously - it is only the wealthy and those of comfortable means in the middle class who can afford to use a credit card - and - the fuckers don't even need one as they could just pay cash and it would not be any less convenient to do so. Those who are living paycheck to paycheck have absolutely no business using a credit card - because they pay their insufficient hard earned income towards having less of their own money to spend when using credit cards.

[-] 1 points by MattHolck0 (3867) 6 years ago

credit cards are obsolete as accounts can be instantly checked through communication

the business started as a trust when confirmation needed backing by a creditor.

the credit system is archaic and the business desperate so possibly dangerous

[-] 1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

There was a report a few years back which indicated that many Americans ended up paying as much in credit card fees as they did on principal. With everything that has happened over the last 8 years, the ongoing concentration of wealth, the loss of upward mobility now faced by the majority, the weakening of the middle class, and the scary economic indicators which are making the news more and more often as wealth continues to concentrate, it is reckless, irresponsible and downright immoral to promote more use of credit cards.

Gwen Stefani, Samuel L. Jackson, Bono, Tiger Woods, the Kardashians, Alec Baldwin, Jennifer Garner, Taylor Swift, Justin Bieber, Ellen Degeneres, ect. It's become rather common for celebrities to endorse the use of credit cards. They do so with no regard whatsoever for the never-ending cycle of growing debt that millions of people get stuck in. They don't even care about the common and well known link between debt and suicide. They go right on literally promoting consumer debt.

http://www.musictimes.com/articles/19187/20141208/credit-card-companies-taking-over-biggest-corporate-sponsors-musicians-according.htm (don't click their ads)

Again, these people have no concience.

[-] 2 points by pigeonlady (284) from Brooklyn, NY 6 years ago

The commercial appeal of celebrity is fickle, and as soon as they have a year in which they may a jot less, they go nuts and shift career emphasis to endorsements and small roles etc to remain relevant. Which they weren't in the first place.

[-] 0 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

Another tidbit regarding Gwen Stefani's partner in crime, Mastercard. Yet another example of corrupt affiliation between big business and government:

ID card with MasterCard’s logo angers Nigerians

The new Nigerian National Identity Cards, with branded logo of the American firm, MasterCard, angered Nigerians amid fears of security and economic breach. Many people called for an immediate halt to the project. President Goodluck Jonathan launched the national electronic identity card, which all Nigerians will have to have by 2019 if they want to vote. Nigerians hit out at the government, saying it would surrender a symbol of national sovereignty and pride to the American firm, MasterCard. People also say the deal was made amid the intense global data spying by the National Security Agency of the United States, which is home to MasterCard. Nigeria’s government has shared the biometrics of 170 million Nigerians to the firm. The government says the card is a means of certifying the holder’s identity, payment card and a personal database repository. But, many analysts say the deal between Nigeria’s National Identity Management Commission, MasterCard and Access Bank hands over all adult Nigerians as direct and compulsory customers of MasterCard. Some even say allowing MasterCard’s logo on the country’s National ID Card could only compare to the transatlantic slave trade. The National Identity Card project for decades continued to be wrapped up in corruption and mismanagement. The allegation of corruption is in addition to other unresolved corruption cases involving missing pension funds, oil subsidy and billions of dollars missing from the petroleum ministry.


[-] 1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

And another, this one proving yet again, what little regard those who stand to profit millions have for the privacy of ordinary (decent) people.

Under fire MasterCard bids to smooth over data privacy fears

MasterCard has moved to soothe consumer privacy fears following a rash of headlines about its plans to sell card transaction data to large retailers and corporations.

The card scheme has been stung into action by a spate of negative publicity and media scare stories on the activities of its Advisors Media Solution unit, which repackages card transaction data for data mining purposes. The unit was officially established in January, but has come under the spotlight following a recent online presentation entitled "Leveraging MasterCard Data Insights to Reach Holiday Shoppers".

Slides from the presentation, given by Susan Grossman, SVP at Advisor Media Solutions, promote MasterCard's ability to track consumer spending patterns for use in targetted loyalty campaigns.

"What if you could know the biggest week for spend and then reach those shoppers who are twice as likely to spend leading up to that week and then create campaigns?" asked Grossman during the presentation.

Although the group is only active in the US, the UK press - both broadsheet and tabloid - has seized on the news, soliciting critical comments from privacy campaigners querying the programme's motives and legitimacy.

Speaking to the Mail Online, Nick Pickles of Big Brother Watch, accused MasterCard of "treating details of our personal behaviour like their own property to be bundled up and sold on without any regard to what customers might want".

On the backfoot, MasterCard has wheeled out its global privacy and data protection officer JoAnn Stonier, to appear in a series of corporate videos emphasising the card scheme's commitment to protecting consumer privacy in the 'Big Data' age.


[-] 0 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

Who cares about the privacy of ordinary people when there are multi-million dollar profits to be made? Right Gwen?

Mastercard, AmEx Quietly Feed Data to Advertisers Privacy Concerns Prevent Some Targeting Options

Credit-card firms are selling their credit-card transaction data for digital advertising and other marketing efforts, but they're not exactly broadcasting the fact for fear of consumer backlash.

Mastercard Advisors launched its Information Services division around two-and-a-half years ago and in recent months has been approaching media-agency trading desks with an enticing offer: data representing 80 billion consumer purchases.

American Express has also turned its transaction data into a revenue stream through its Business Insights consulting division which has aimed direct mail and online offers to card holders on behalf of advertisers for years, though on an aggregate level. More recently, AmEx has modeled audience segments for use in online ad targeting. The company declined to name any partners in the endeavor, but stressed the AmEx data models don't allow for direct targeting of its card holders.

Mastercard recently aligned with Maxpoint, a digital-ad firm that combines lots of publicly available information, such as data from Secretaries of State and health data from the Centers for Disease Control, to define audiences within specific ZIP code regions. The Mastercard information is "the first credit-card data set that we've incorporated into our system," said Maxpoint CEO Joe Epperson.

Maxpoint sells display, mobile and video ads featuring targeted coupons or store promotions on behalf of CPG brands and other types of advertisers such as restaurants. The Mastercard data shows how high or low people index within a specific ZIP code for certain types of purchases. Using the Mastercard data, a burger or pizza chain might use the system to push promotions to neighborhoods in which people spend more than the average at fast-food joints. The firms have worked together for around six months to get the system in place.

Mastercard also makes its data available through Exelate, a data-management platform that feeds information from Mastercard and other partners including Acxiom and Nielsen into digital-ad exchanges for targeting. The credit-card firm compiles audience segments based on its cardholders' transactions, pegging people as likely to shop at a sporting goods store or specialty retailer, for example. Exelate uses another company to transfer the Mastercard segments online to target large, modeled audiences geographically according to ZIP+4 codes, rather than targeting individuals based on their personal transactions.

Mastercard stresses the transaction data is anonymized and provided in aggregate. "It's really more of a broad database," said Susan Grossman, group head of media solutions for MasterCard Advisors Information Services.

Privacy Qualms

Advertisers can target ads to large pools of Mastercard customers categorized into segments such as "Top Tier Auto Spenders," or "Frequent Transactors," said a source at a media-agency trading desk using Mastercard data who asked to remain anonymous. The information is "not very granular," said the source, who suggested privacy concerns have prevented Mastercard from offering more detailed data on an individual basis.

Still, the source indicated he thought he was targeting actual Mastercard cardholders through online matching and cookie dropping, rather than merely targeting geographic-level segments. While he said the Mastercard data performs relatively better than other information available for digital targeting, the source called it "convoluted." Privacy concerns certainly play a role in how firms like Mastercard make their data available, but those qualms aren't preventing purchase data from seeping online more frequently. Acxiom has partnered with Facebook to test ad targeting on the social site using customer loyalty shopping data. The company also recently unveiled plans to connect the data it stores for its clients including purchase history and loyalty card information to publisher sites.

Venture Development Center serves as an intermediary between data brokers and brands and data providers. The company has discussed data monetization with most if not all credit card firms, said VDC President and COO Matthew Staudt, noting they have "a high level of interest, but also a very strong sense of caution." The information supplied by credit card firms and other data companies like Acxiom is arguably more reliable because it reflects real consumer purchases as opposed to inferences about what people appear to be interested in. The majority of behavioral data used to target digital ads has its share of problems, suggested the trading desk source who said people might be added to audience segments (think in-market shoe buyers) based only on a one-time site visit. In addition, some computers in homes are used by multiple people, muddying behavioral profiles.


[-] 0 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

Scamming, inconveniencing, and embarrassing ordinary (decent) people for big business profit. But who cares about that as long as the rich get paid? Right Gwen?


[-] 1 points by StillModestCapitalist (343) 6 years ago

MasterCard scams retailers, settles class action lawsuit, some opt out to sue individually: