Advertising Execs Diss Ad Blockers

[TheGardener]

Interactive Advertising Bureau head honcho Randall Rothenberg blasted ad blockers at the start of the industry group’s annual leadership meeting on Monday, calling them “profiteers” and a threat to free speech.
While he singled out several popular ad blockers in his opening remarks, most of his venom was directed at Adblock Plus, which had griped publicly about being “disinvited” from the conference.

Imagine an advertising executive calling someone a "profiteers". I guess advertisers only run not-for-profit firms, whose collective sole mission are to better mankind. Ad blockers are also deemed a threat to free speech, according to advertisers. I didn't know that advertisers spend a lot of their time concerned about the Constitution and my rights. Advertisers do have the right to speak, but they forget that I have the right not to listen. Ad blockers support my right not to listen. But I guess according to internet advertisers, my view is hate speech.

AdBlocker Plus is, according to the Interactive Advertising Bureau,

stealing from publishers, subverting freedom of the press, operating a business model predicated on censorship of content and ultimately forcing consumers to pay more money for less and less diverse information.”

This is demagoguery. If websites feel I am stealing their content because my browser has AdBlocker Plus installed, it is their right to block me from reading. But they don't. Some block me because I don't have a subscription, and it is there right to determine who (payers and non-payers) can access content on their sites. But it is not up to the advertiser to block me. And since when does the advertiser care about my money, except how to extract it from me. If anyone is subverting freedom, it is the advertisers who collect, store, aggregate and sell my personal information, without any compensation to me.

In the US, an estimated 16 percent of Internet users — or 45 million — were blocking ads as of the second quarter of 2015, a year-over-year increase of 48 percent, according to a study from Adobe and Page Fair.

http://nypost.com/2016/01/26/internet-advertising-honcho-slams-ad-blockers-as-profiteers/

 

[Printer Bandit]

advertising is such a cancer

 

[Homerboy]

I run adblocker, but admit that I sort of feel "bad" about doing it. I get why websites are free, and I'm skipping around that.

That being said, the AT forums were the SPECIFIC reason I install Adblock. They couldn't get a handle on that banner issue so I said screw it.

 

[Skeeedunt]

They got greedy and let ad networks devolve into spyware infested, music blaring, plugin consuming garbage. I have no sympathy.

 

[Anubis]

They got greedy and let ad networks devolve into spyware infested, music blaring, plugin consuming garbage. I have no sympathy.

this

 

[lxskllr]

They got greedy and let ad networks devolve into spyware infested, music blaring, plugin consuming garbage. I have no sympathy.

This. I don't even care that much about ads that are reasonable, but they're a security and privacy risk, so all get blocked, and they'll always be blocked unless a site gives good information on how their ads are generated, and what steps were taken to ensure security/privacy.

 

[3chordcharlie]

This guy is full of shit.

It is not obvious that content should be free (or ad-supported), but the internet started that way.

Since most content was free, the utility providers (ISPs) have priced the value of the content into their fees. So I pay $75/mo for my limited connection, at 10 year old speeds, instead of a more competitively balanced price.

I'm 'OK' paying that because I count the value of all the content I receive, the majority of it without charge.

In reality my money is being distributed unfairly, with content creators getting the shaft while entrenched ISPs receive the lion's share of user money.

 

[Newbian]

Too bad I can't get the link to work as it's being blocked by my ad blocker.

 

[Homerboy]

They got greedy and let ad networks devolve into spyware infested, music blaring, plugin consuming garbage. I have no sympathy.

Preach!

 

[Krazy4Real]

They got greedy and let ad networks devolve into spyware infested, music blaring, plugin consuming garbage. I have no sympathy.

100% this!

 

[Shlong]

Ad Blocker Plus allows advertisers to unblock their ads if they pay a fee (ironic). I disable my adblock on websites I enjoy going to (arstechnica, anandtech). While some other sites I enjoy the content and if it has too many ads, I'll let the ads load and simply read the article in "reader view" so they get money for the ad loading while I get to read in peace.

 

[Ns1]

I actually side with the advertiser, but cannot deny this line of thought:

They got greedy and let ad networks devolve into spyware infested, music blaring, plugin consuming garbage. I have no sympathy.

 

[Platypus]

He clearly doesn't give a shit about anyone's privacy or security, only how they're going to make their next buck. You reap what you sow.

 

[balloonshark]

Computer security 101.

1. Some ads contain malware.
2. Never click on a random link/ad and enter your personal and financial information.

I would love to support sites by viewing ads if they were 100% safe, were unobtrusive and didn't consume large amounts of bandwidth. I still would never click on a random ad and enter my info. It's hard to tell where in the world you get redirected to and you may land on an infected or fake site. I always go directly to the site and then look for whatever I want.

 

[Slew Foot]

Ad Block+ ghostery + No script


F you advertisements

 

[Shlong]

Computer security 101.

1. Some ads contain malware.
2. Never click on a random link/ad and enter your personal and financial information.

I would love to support sites by viewing ads if they were 100% safe, were unobtrusive and didn't consume large amounts of bandwidth. I still would never click on a random ad and enter my info. It's hard to tell where in the world you get redirected to and you may land on an infected or fake site. I always go directly to the site and then look for whatever I want.

Back in the Windows XP / Internet Explorer era it was really easy to get infected with malware. My father who is computer illiterate I had to reformat or use combofix every few months on his computer. Now with Windows 10 and a modern browser it is very difficult to get malware, he hasn't gotten malware in years and anything short of downloading an executable file and running it, it's not easy getting malware these days.

In terms of blocking cookies / tracking, I don't really have anything to hide so I don't really care about that. The odds of seeing relevant ads increase but I hardly click on em still.

 

[Ken g6]

Computer security 101.

1. Some ads contain malware.
2. Never click on a random link/ad and enter your personal and financial information.

I would love to support sites by viewing ads if they were 100% safe, were unobtrusive and didn't consume large amounts of bandwidth. I still would never click on a random ad and enter my info. It's hard to tell where in the world you get redirected to and you may land on an infected or fake site. I always go directly to the site and then look for whatever I want.

I mostly blame Microsoft for introducing iframes in an early version of IE. (IE3?) Before iframes, content was included with <img>, or rarely <embed> for Flash. (Punch the monkey!) After iframe, advertisers got the idea they could include scripts and all sorts of junk.

At this point, I think advertisements should be images. No iframes, no scripts, no flash, just images. If an advertiser wants an animation, they should do an SVG animation. With proper security, including blocking the loading of fonts from SVGs, that could allow for a safe, secure, and effective advertising environment.

 

[JSt0rm]

dont complain about shit content if you run adblockers or steal film/tv/books/games.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

dont complain about shit content if you run adblockers or steal film/tv/books/games.

Poor content has nothing to do with advertising. There is tons of poor content out there because it's easier than doing the work to create content and it's cheaper to attract new business through spam than to support existing business.

 

[Leyawiin]

More and more sites are detecting adblockers and either nagging you about it or blocking the website altogether. Yes, you can use Noscript to defeat the detection, but it can often block legitimate non-advertising content. I liked it a few years ago when Adblock did its thing undetected.

 

[Newbian]

More and more sites are detecting adblockers and either nagging you about it or blocking the website altogether. Yes, you can use Noscript to defeat the detection, but it can often block legitimate non-advertising content. I liked it a few years ago when Adblock did its thing undetected.

Most of those nags can be added to the block list so you never see them again.

 

[JulesMaximus]

advertising is such a cancer

:thumbsup: It's why people buy pickup trucks... and vote republican.

 

[Kwatt]

While I will support his right to free speech.

I am going to hold on to my right to have earplugs.

I don't think the right to free speech means I have an obligation to listen.


.

 

[Jeff7]

If their marketing people do their jobs and start a good campaign, people who block or don't watch ads will become shunned. BS like "They took muh speech and muh freedoms!" can get certain people riled up real quick.

Ads are tolerable in certain quantities if they have more maturity than an attention-starved 3-year-old.
But most of them run like the marketing team sat at a daycare center taking notes on how the most unruly kids got attention most effectively, and then tried amplifying the effect even more.




I made this post a few years old, concerning adblockers:

- Irritating, flashing, moving ads don't make me want to buy your product. They instead generate an increasing desire to inflict injury. Pop-ups are in a similar class.
- Sound in ads is not ok.
- If your adserver is slow, and is constantly holding up page loads, that increases chances of earning a block. dynamic2.anandtech.com was like this - it would constantly cause pages to take considerably longer to load, sometimes to the point of causing a timeout and failed pageload.
- If I find that your Flash advertisement is generating a significant CPU load, that also increases the chance of earning a block.

More and more sites are detecting adblockers and either nagging you about it or blocking the website altogether. Yes, you can use Noscript to defeat the detection, but it can often block legitimate non-advertising content. I liked it a few years ago when Adblock did its thing undetected.

Some of them are serving content from the advertiser's servers. Block the server, block the content. Add in URLs that are semi-randomized or hashed, and it can be tough to view something.

10 second video clip? Wait for these two 15-second ads.
Oh wait, the second ad's server stalled out. Reload the page to try again. Sit through the first ad again.
Ok good, the 30 second ad is over. The ad is now going to wait another 10 seconds to see if I want to click on their buttons to go to the site.

 

[MongGrel]

Ad Block+ ghostery + No script


F you advertisements

+1, at least for ghostery + No script myself.