Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 70 posts

Re: Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

#51

Post by tomtoise »

Nursie wrote: post #47
FussyZeus wrote: post #40

Axel Springer is not the only publisher that’s taking a confrontational approach to dealing with ad blockers, The FT recently reported. U.K. newspaper City AM banned ad blockers from its website; U.K. broadcasters ITV and Channel 4 have now done the same; and the Washington Post redirects readers to a subscription page, or asks them to sign up to newsletters, or disable their ad-blocking software. Even Yahoo has gott…

>> U.K. broadcasters ITV and Channel 4 have now done the same Have they? Just went to their sites, no indications there.... is it just mobile?

No. Try playing some video content on C4, if you're running any kind of adblock, it refuses to play. There was a bit of an 'arms race' back when it was first introduced between C4 and developers on the internet. C4 won, adblockers simply won't work on their site, video ads are unskippable and every 5 mins or so.

Re: Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

#52

Post by FussyZeus »

kdamken wrote: post #45
FussyZeus wrote: post #40

Axel Springer is not the only publisher that’s taking a confrontational approach to dealing with ad blockers, The FT recently reported. U.K. newspaper City AM banned ad blockers from its website; U.K. broadcasters ITV and Channel 4 have now done the same; and the Washington Post redirects readers to a subscription page, or asks them to sign up to newsletters, or disable their ad-blocking software. Even Yahoo has gott…

Right? It always cracks me up when I see an paywall. It's like, who do you think you are? I don't care whatsoever about your site or business, I care about quickly finding the information I'm looking for.

And you shouldn't care! Their business success is none of your business, you're the customer and you are there for the content, not to help them out. If you're running a business and not making money then your business sucks and you need to do better.

Monetizing via ads is proving to NOT WORK yet so many businesses are still banking on it. I don't fucking get it.

Re: Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

#53

Post by FussyZeus »

reustle wrote: post #50
FussyZeus wrote: post #40

Axel Springer is not the only publisher that’s taking a confrontational approach to dealing with ad blockers, The FT recently reported. U.K. newspaper City AM banned ad blockers from its website; U.K. broadcasters ITV and Channel 4 have now done the same; and the Washington Post redirects readers to a subscription page, or asks them to sign up to newsletters, or disable their ad-blocking software. Even Yahoo has gott…

> Even Yahoo has gotten in on the action, blocking users from their email when they have AdBlock running. Wait, really? Users can't read their email if an adblocker is installed? I can't imagine what mother would do if she ran into a error message like that while trying to check her email (but she doesn't use yahoo).

Wow really? I hadn't heard that (and never used yahoo), that's just straight crazy.

Re: Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

#54

Post by Nursie »

tomtoise wrote: post #51
Nursie wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> U.K. broadcasters ITV and Channel 4 have now done the same Have they? Just went to their sites, no indications there.... is it just mobile?

No. Try playing some video content on C4, if you're running any kind of adblock, it refuses to play. There was a bit of an 'arms race' back when it was first introduced between C4 and developers on the internet. C4 won, adblockers simply won't work on their site, video ads are unskippable and every 5 mins or so.

Ah, ok, thanks. I'll have a look later from a computer that has a working flash install, this one does not...

Re: Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

#55

Post by hsod »

FussyZeus wrote: post #40

Axel Springer is not the only publisher that’s taking a confrontational approach to dealing with ad blockers, The FT recently reported. U.K. newspaper City AM banned ad blockers from its website; U.K. broadcasters ITV and Channel 4 have now done the same; and the Washington Post redirects readers to a subscription page, or asks them to sign up to newsletters, or disable their ad-blocking software. Even Yahoo has gott…

I'm totally in favor of this type of solution. The go-to justification around here is "it's my computer, I'll use it to display anything I want, just because you served me data over HTTP doesn't give you the right to dictate what's on my screen."

I think it's is a pretty compelling argument, but if we're being fair then the provider should have the right NOT to serve you data based on what you intend to do with it.

Re: Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

#56

Post by wooger »

tomtoise wrote: post #51
Nursie wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> U.K. broadcasters ITV and Channel 4 have now done the same Have they? Just went to their sites, no indications there.... is it just mobile?

No. Try playing some video content on C4, if you're running any kind of adblock, it refuses to play. There was a bit of an 'arms race' back when it was first introduced between C4 and developers on the internet. C4 won, adblockers simply won't work on their site, video ads are unskippable and every 5 mins or so.

Yes, they have made a user-hostile service, that everyone I know avoids in favour of getting the content via another (ad-free) route. Good one.

Re: Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

#57

Post by brightsize »

afandian wrote: post #44
microtonal wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sssht, you might give them ideas. I am cynical enough to believe that they will add a IR heartrate sensor (a la XBox One Kinect) to 'pause entertainment' when nobody is in the room. Formulated like that, it even sounds like a feature ;).

Spotify won't let you mute during adverts and will pause if it detects the system volume drop quickly. They can't detect the volume on external speakers. But there's no reason why they couldn't with a microphone.

iHeart, at least on Android, will download (using precious cell bandwidth) video ads and play them, during which time it disables the "back" button. You're forced to let the ad play. You can still switch to another app while this is going on, but IIRC you can't turn off the audio part of the ad by doing so. My "solution" when listening to iHeart is to keep the Android settings app running with the iHeart app selected, ready to "Force stop" it.

Re: Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

#58

Post by toomuchtodo »

hsod wrote: post #55
FussyZeus wrote: post #40

Axel Springer is not the only publisher that’s taking a confrontational approach to dealing with ad blockers, The FT recently reported. U.K. newspaper City AM banned ad blockers from its website; U.K. broadcasters ITV and Channel 4 have now done the same; and the Washington Post redirects readers to a subscription page, or asks them to sign up to newsletters, or disable their ad-blocking software. Even Yahoo has gott…

I'm totally in favor of this type of solution. The go-to justification around here is "it's my computer, I'll use it to display anything I want, just because you served me data over HTTP doesn't give you the right to dictate what's on my screen." I think it's is a pretty compelling argument, but if we're being fair then the provider should have the right NOT to serve you data based on what you intend to do with it.

> but if we're being fair then the provider should have the right NOT to serve you data based on what you intend to do with it.

Technology is a tool, and the world is not fair. I'm not sending you intention HTTP headers over. I make a request, you send me a response, I do what I want with that response. So sorry that ruins your business model.

Re: Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

#59

Post by thetmkay »

Two things seemingly are true:

1. information is a commodity (including most news)

2. information is valuable

I'm looking at this problem right now because which answer to this question is chosen is critical in shaping how we as a society function (and what the online landscape will look like).

Do people (in general) care about good information sources (your own personal criteria) to give money to them (by whitelisting, paying for subscription, donations etc)?

Full disclosure: I'm working on a project that is trying to tackle this problem.

Re: Axel Springer Goes After iOS 9 Ad Blockers in New Legal Battle

#60

Post by thetmkay »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #13

I started using iOS ad blockers on day one. Judging by the amount I have to recharge - I'm on pre paid - I use about 50% of the data I used to and spend proportionally less. I also stopped using the Twitter and Facebook apps in favour of the mobile web sites. I only see Twitter ads now. There really needs to be another model.

Totally agree. The ad-subsidised business model is flawed on so many levels. Personally the biggest one for me is that the evolution of ads moves less away from information and more towards emotional manipulation.

Question is - what other model? Would you give money to news?

Post reply on HN