11–20 of 217 posts
It's amazing to me that I still actively seek out some legacy ads (flyers in the Sunday paper, Thursday car ads, Wednesday butcher ads) in the local paper. But except for the occasional Google organic result, I never, ever get any utility from online advertising.
The closest thing is the ads in podcasts, which tend to be built around a story and are more compelling. I've looked at several of those advertisers and bought a couple.
For a very long time, I did not want to use ad blockers. I have used ads in the past to monetize some of my own projects, and I really did not want to stab the creators of quality content. However, last week I finally reversed my decision and started using ad blockers. Why? Frankly, many sites are just greedy. Banners were ugly enough (and I tolerated them) but many sites these days show ads that cover the content, a…
Monetization from advertising must be brutal if so much content is being displayed in worse and worse ways.
For a very long time, I did not want to use ad blockers. I have used ads in the past to monetize some of my own projects, and I really did not want to stab the creators of quality content. However, last week I finally reversed my decision and started using ad blockers. Why? Frankly, many sites are just greedy. Banners were ugly enough (and I tolerated them) but many sites these days show ads that cover the content, a…
Until one of the news sites I regularly read was barely usable by always running on 100% CPU, which means it was not possible to open it on multiple tabs without making my computer fully unusable.
And until Google started to use video ads in my region. I figured that it would be better for the local business to block the ads as if they cluelessly start to annoy me with their video ads, they would anger and loose one of their potential and possibly already loyal customer. Beside some of the ads had very questionable moral value.
I would call this trend telefication - ad publishers want to control when people see ads and for how long. I think that this is not acceptable.
PS. Paying for content is also not an option until there is an anonymous way to make a payment and the payments are minuscule.
Otherwise we will have serious censorship issue.
I'm thinking it would be something like "B Corporation". Not exactly a charity, but not necessarily trying to maximize profit either. Charge a high monthly price, maybe $50/month for immediate access to new articles, but after 1 month everything becomes freely available.
Information will undoubtedly be copied and posted elsewhere anyway, the only thing you can realistically control is who gets access to it first. People who value up-to-date news that's guaranteed to be impartial would pay for early access to it, I think. Everyone else would still get to benefit from it as well, just slightly delayed.
For a very long time, I did not want to use ad blockers. I have used ads in the past to monetize some of my own projects, and I really did not want to stab the creators of quality content. However, last week I finally reversed my decision and started using ad blockers. Why? Frankly, many sites are just greedy. Banners were ugly enough (and I tolerated them) but many sites these days show ads that cover the content, a…