Earlier today, Julian Assange the founder of Wikileaks was released on bail from a British prison.
This has created a personal dilemma. In a post on 30 November, I stated my opinion that releasing stolen confidential information was an act of treason. I stand by that opinion and believe that Mr. Assange should be brought to justice to answer for that crime.
But I am pleased that he has been granted bail while awaiting an extradition hearing in connection with allegations of rape from Sweden.
I am not a legal expert, but from what has been published, it appears that the charges of rape are flimsy and unlikely to result in a conviction. It is reported that the original Swedish prosecutor declined to pursue the case. If his detention was the result of some behind-the-scenes manipulation by undisclosed governments, that is not good enough.
So what is my dilemma? Supporting the release of a person who I believe should be prosecuted for a serious crime. I would have my faith in justice restored if the government of the USA started extradition proceedings against Mr. Assange and if the British authorities then declined to grant him bail. But as this has played out, releasing him is the right thing to do.
It has been my day for holding conflicting opinions – must be an age thing. This morning I received a fairly scruffy and uninspiring email from a sender I did not recognise. The only reason I opened it was that it was sent to an email address that I use on some of my social media profiles.
Seeing that it was from a United Kingdom address, I clicked the link and got to a sales page for an Internet Marketing System that promised instant riches from a number of automated blogs. I was intrigued by the copywriting, whoever the copywriter was, he or she was very good, so much so that I read right to the end.
Until! The statement that this product was so good that it couldn’t be released to every aspiring seeker of Internet riches, it was being restricted to the first 200 lucky buyers. Big red flag. I know this is done frequently, but to me it’s unethical. So I followed up with a few searches to find out what people were saying about the programme. Sure enough, the unfullfilled promise of restricted users had upset several buyers.
By searching the name of the programme, a number of the automated blogs it produced came up. The article spinner software had not done a good job, the grammar was bad and the tone of the articles was artificial.
So from getting a really good feeling from the sales page initially, starting, against my better judgement, to believe some of the promises, most of that good work was ruined by one sentence which was patently unbelievable. The rest of the good work was gone when I found proof that the promise of good, automated content was not fulfilled.
Sadly, this programme will attract a lot of new internet marketers who will part with their money and not get the results they expected.
What’s the connection between wikileaks and misleading sales pitches?
Just that we need to make sure that our personal prejudices (and I have plenty) don’t unfairly influence our sense of justice and fairplay.
And more importantly for internet and network marketers, that we don’t create conflicting emotions in our customers and prospects minds by making promises that cannot be fulfilled in our marketing messages.
Wishing you success in all your endeavours.