mattrix: And then you obviously go back and refresh the page to check for another insensitive ad.

Are you actively trying to wind yourself up...?
Do you think there is someone sitting there telling it to show you these ads?
If they wanted to do that, I'm sure they would run an advert about fire detectors or fire proof cladding.

Its randomise by a computer and usually based on your internet activity.

Therefore, its actually your fault the ad is showing.

It's actually the same ads. I think it's rather unfortunate the ads somewhat "fit" into the story.

Some places put a lot of effort into what Ad is seen. IE Not on terrorism storys, user generated content etc etc, more for the sake of the brand than the user mind you. The Herald either isn't, or doesn't care.

mattrix: You'd prefer to see 'sad ads'? Do you also disagree with TV ads after a sad story on 6pm news?

 

I don't think the OP wants to see "sad ads". I just think the OP was expressing amusement at the irony of the messages in the ads appearing on that specific story.

I think there's nothing more to it.

mattrix: They cant run their site for free. Same with ads here. They could disable ads for certain stories but then who decides what's sensitive enough? Where do you draw the line?

Im sorry but what a knee-jerk reaction. There are what's caused content filters on all advertisement agencies as I said in the first post, if there isn't maybe choose not to put an ad on that particular story?

"We can't control what ads are displayed" is such a lazy response.

A classic I saw recently was a cosmetics company with the logo "Pretty is Easy".

Ads nowadays are targetted.

The OP's "enjoys irony", "kinda weird", and "social misfit" values must be through the roof. 

Years ago there was a stamp collector that was murdered.... Herald ran article on it, right next to the article was an advert from NZPost selling collectible stamps.