ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

AdBlock Plus To Not Block All Ads

<< < (6/15) > >>

Wonder what "inducement" (or threat) was offered to the creators of AdBlock to "fix" how their product operated? Because I strongly doubt this decision was made purely after a philisophical discussion around the company cracker-barrel. The somewhat defensive tone in the announcement leads me to believe AdBlock is getting something in return for  making this change.

It's an annoying change in policy even though I permit ads from most sites I visit regulary for exactly the justifications given. But that's *MY* choice, and not one made for me by AdBlock.

In the last few months I've made a conscious effort to spend far less time on the web than I previously have. Mainly because I'm getting so sick of the commercialism (and juvenile crassness) I'm starting to see creeping in everywhere.

Maybe I'll just need to cut back a bit more going forward.  :-\
-40hz (December 12, 2011, 07:23 PM)
--- End quote ---
I'm totally with you.  My web use has just naturally decreased a lot over the last couple of years.  It's not so easy to find things, too much clutter.  It's more of a headache than not.  The number of sites I visit has decreased quite dramatically.  the internet doesn't really feel all that fun or educational anymore.  It feels like it's become a thing to try to get people to click around as much as possible.  Facebook, youtube, google...they've all become increasingly more annoying to use.  So I stop using.  Now, I'll focus more on my ow personal projects and see how those go.

Should an ad blocker perform as described and block ads? Should they treat all ads equally? Should they decide for me which ads I should or should not see?

If I install an ad blocker, it's because I want to block ads, not just block ads the developer finds objectionable.

You wouldn't put up with a word processing application that only saved some documents, not saving the ones that the developer finds objectionable.

You wouldn't put up with a media player that refuses to play your favorite mp3's because the developer hates your taste in music.

You wouldn't put up with a photo editor that wouldn't allow you to crop a photo of your cat because the developer hates cats.

A word processing application should save all documents without discriminating.
A media player should play all songs without discriminating.
A photo editor should edit all photos without discriminating.
An ad blocker should block all ads without discriminating.

If the AdBlock Plus developers do not feel good about blocking ads, all ads, they shouldn't be in the ad blocking business.

Also, here's some food for thought - If you block ads, then aren't you being immensely selfish? After-all it means you are leeching a service while happily off loading the cost of your usage onto your fellow netizens who don't block the ads. You are using them to subsidise your own gains.
-Eóin (December 13, 2011, 11:58 AM)
--- End quote ---

Is it unethical for a person that already knows they will not click a pay-per-click ad to block them? The site only gets paid if a person actually clicks the ads. Pay-per-action ads only pay out if someone not only clicks, but also buys. If I know in advance that I will not be interested in any ad that attempts to drag me to a site where they will try to sell me something, am I wrong for blocking them? The site will not get paid either way, whether I allow them or not.

No, I don't think it is unethical.

On the other hand, if I know of an ad network in which the ads are pay-per-day, and the amount the webmaster makes is based on their total traffic (in other words my eyeballs count), and that ad network actually carries ads in which I may be interested, ones that will not try to sell me something, ones that lead mainly to blogs and web comics, should I go out of my way to unblock them?

Yes, I should and I do. I do not block Project Wonderful or Entrecard ads, for example.

I also do not block Facebook ads. Even if I will not click them, I do often find them amusing. Plus Facebook does give you a way to opt out of specific ads for various reasons. Facebook allows me to click a little X on all religious ads and tell them that I do not want to see them because they are in opposition to my views. They also allow me to report misleading, repetitive, or irrelevant ads the same way. I don't have to be subjected to ads for Farmville, diploma mills, weight loss products, baby products, BP, Bank of America, Justin Bieber's latest album, or political propaganda for the GOP.

But that is my decision to make, not the decision of the developer of the ad blocker I use.

The genesis of things like Adblock should be getting rid of bad stuff (ie popups or ads that carry malware). Using Adblock for visual improvement of sites is pointless in my opinion. If a site I like decided to carry, for example, 1 'clean' flash ad I am not going to stop going there.

I run adsense and some other ads on my site and i don't mind if anyone uses ad blocker. As far as adsense ads and other non-target ad networks are concerned they have no clue what type of ads to show on a particular site. For example, my blog is on programming niche, but ads of belly dancer academy was bidding on tech keywords. WTF ?There are also some weird brands bidding on wrong keywords just to get more leads. Many ads like pharma and stuff leaks through adwords on regular basis, It's better to block those ads instead of thinking that you're helping publisher in anyway. Besides that most of the ad network shave publisher earning and advertiser earning with bad traffic and poor performance calculation.

Un-targeted, keyword troll advertisers bid low on keywords and these brands are displayed on many sites. Video and Flash ads are more annoying than contextual but text ads take long time to load in some cases. e.g. Kontera and infolinks take more time to load webpages, so yes blocking them does help especially if you're on low bandwidth plan or on slow internet.

Carol Haynes:
I personally agree with April (app103) but I can also see the other side of the coin.

AdBlockers were originally developed because advertising became so intrusive.

Many useful websites are ad-supported and so by not seeing and occasionally clicking those ads we will loose those useful sites.

This for me is a real dilemma - I even object to all the text ads in GMail - which just irritate me - I won't click on one on principle. The only ads I click on are whether there is some value added to an advert such as a good quality review from a trusted source.

What is really insidious is that AdBlock Plus, by choosing to follow this path, will move from the trusted service they are now and become no longer a free ad-blocking service but a hostage-ware advertising service.

By following this approach they want you to see the ads they want you to see - and I am sure they are aiming for a revenue stream from the ads they let through.

At the moment they are allowing an ad-optout but how long before it becomes accepted practice and the opt-out disappears.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version