AARP declines to be shaken down by netroots.

In fact, I do believe that there’s a threat here:

As publishers of the world’s largest magazine and the preeminent online destination for individuals 50+, we understand the desire to pursue advertising revenue. Additionally, no one is immune from our current economic crisis and we can appreciate your plea for increased ad revenue. That said, we also strongly honor the integrity of our journalists and writers/editors/content developers. AARP would never allow advertisers to dictate our editorial content based on the amount of ad space purchased, and we would be hesitant to buy ads with any media that suggested it might act otherwise.

Bolding mine, and via Instapundit.

It would seem that AARP is less impressed with the netroots’ complaints than, say, Americans United for Change (although I should note that even the latter left itself some wiggle room, there), but that’s to be expected. AARP is huge. AARP is also not particularly inclined to play any more partisan political games than it absolutely has to – when you have 30 million-plus members who have political views across the spectrum, and who vote, that’s a smart way to operate – so I’m pretty sure that they probably didn’t feel like being nagged on this topic. Whether this translates into a pulling of ads from various Lefty blogs, or blogs in general, has yet to be seen, but at least if it does happen we’ll know who to blame:

Jane Hamsher. I swear, that woman can do more damage to the progressive cause in one day than I have in six years or so of blogging.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.