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

Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 217 posts

Re: Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

#41

Post by Kesty »

manachar wrote: post #13
karterk wrote: post #5

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…

My limit was reached a while ago when intrusive ads starting becoming the norm. My personal least favorite are ones that move the content of the page so I'm bouncing around trying to read the same paragraph and ones that somehow think my cursor hovering is sufficient reason to play sound or "expand" an ad. Monetization from advertising must be brutal if so much content is being displayed in worse and worse ways.

Monetization is not great, but I think the biggest culprit in this case is a mix of competition, ad agencies and classic greed.

The number of impressions is limited and declining (moving from the desktop where you can put 15 ads on each page to the mobile where you have max 1 or 2 ads per page) and companies are fighting for the attention of the user while content providers try to squeeze as many adspaces they can in their pages to incrase/stabilize the declining CPM (cost per thousand impression), so they ask their ad agencies to create more inventive and engaging (attention grapping/annoying) banners.

When they ask website to do their new and improved format, they usually get a no in response. Then they shove more money at the problem until some website can't say no anymore and accept the new format.

Once someone else has accepted the others can't keep saying no or the company will only do banners with the competition that actually accept the new format, so everyone does.

All new invasive formats usually start with clear and strict rules: only one each day, for a max of two per week. And we can show the ad to each users a maximum of twice a day.

But this "rules" become progressively less strict as more and more companies want to purchase the new format that has a much higher cost and some ad manager will come to you faking sadness (while actually counting his cut behind his back) and say the magic words: "I don't like it either but it's how we paid your salaries and it's too much money to pass up."

And this is how banner "standards" are born.

Re: Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

#42

Post by iand »

cm2187 wrote: post #31
sokoloff wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They block one vector of tracking. They don't block CDN-based tracking: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/11/30/a-new-type-of-trackin... (note the juxtaposition of "new" and "2010")

Looks like akamai needs to be added to my blockers list.

Don't forget Google's free hosting of Javascript libraries and webfonts. The cost of serving those is recouped by dropping a cookie on you. Also Google DNS can give them great insight into domain popularity.

Re: Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

#43

Post by tomp »

adamt wrote: post #7
karterk wrote: post #5

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…

I agree completely and like you for a long time I didn't use ad-blockers on morale grounds. Personally I don't get overly excited about the tracking/re-targeting, but what did bother me was how ridiculously intrusive the ads on some sites that totally destroyed my user experience, wasted my batteries and cellular data and at times prevented me from (on mobile) from getting to the content I actually wanted. With mobil…

> On Google search sometimes the people who will pay for ads are sometimes a better signal than those that SEO their way to the top.

Are they?

If you have 2 products that sell for X, one company spends Y on ads and X - Y on product, the other spends X on product. It would seem that the second one should be SEOd (by good reviews and recommendations) to the top, and that would be the more important signal.

Re: Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

#44

Post by tomp »

team_doom wrote: post #20
karterk wrote: post #5

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…

I think this is the wrong way to approach this. You're essentially pirating content now. If you don't like the ads, stop using the site. It's that simple. To take it a step farther, send an email to customer service explaining WHY you're no longer using the site. This sends a much stronger message to them about what makes you unhappy with the service they provide.

> You're essentially pirating content now.

Earlier, the websites were "pirating" his/her device & browser.

Re: Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

#45

Post by wernercd »

team_doom wrote: post #27
cm2187 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually end up doing that with websites that block browsers with ad-blockers from viewing the content. It takes a while to change my habits but when they are changed there is no coming back to these sites.

To me that comes off as "Hey, I'm angry you won't let me view your content without paying for it anymore". Obviously in this case paying for it is viewing/watching ads. Not trying to get high and mighty with anyone. The whole ad-block culture just screams entitlement to me and it bothers me a lot.

I would have agreed with you to some extent (Adblockers are STEELING!!! Really... companies deserve to earn money for what they provide)...

Until 30 after 30: http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/08/you-say-advertising-i-say...

Block users who have adblock? Okay...

Serve those users pop under malware for over a week to users who was kind enough to disable ad blocking? Not Okay...

I lost my inclination to feel guilty after that... Ad Blocking is a SECURITY measure at this point, since ad networks can't seem to protect me.

I'll protect myself to the best of my ability.

Re: Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

#46

Post by hobs »

team_doom wrote: post #20
karterk wrote: post #5

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…

I think this is the wrong way to approach this. You're essentially pirating content now. If you don't like the ads, stop using the site. It's that simple. To take it a step farther, send an email to customer service explaining WHY you're no longer using the site. This sends a much stronger message to them about what makes you unhappy with the service they provide.

Unfortunately due to the large occurrence of malware being served over ad networks I will never choose to view ads even for trusted sites.

I will and have support people in other mediums(donations, patreon, etc), but the advertising model serving bad actor's code to my browser is not going to fly.

Re: Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

#47

Post by chrisseaton »

FussyZeus wrote: post #38
karterk wrote: post #5

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…

The last three viral infections I've had on my PC's have come from advertisements on websites. I generally will whitelist a select few websites that I trust to not destroy my computer and to not run irritating ads, but at the end of the day this is my damn computer, not the ad companies. If I don't feel like running their code then I can make my machine not do that and there isn't jack they can do about it. Oh no I c…

How does an advert deliver a virus? Are these genuine remote native code execution vulnerabilities in browsers? Or just breaking the sandbox somehow and using internal browser APIs?

Isn't what you need a security patch for your browser rather than an advert blocker?

Re: Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

#48

Post by 15charlimit »

team_doom wrote: post #20
karterk wrote: post #5

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…

I think this is the wrong way to approach this. You're essentially pirating content now. If you don't like the ads, stop using the site. It's that simple. To take it a step farther, send an email to customer service explaining WHY you're no longer using the site. This sends a much stronger message to them about what makes you unhappy with the service they provide.

>You're essentially pirating content now.

No, what you're doing is reformatting content that is being openly broadcast to anyone who cares to look in its direction, to best suit your interests and device capabilities and security.

If a site literally cannot survive without ads being viewed, they should block those who use ad blockers or reconsider their business model since blocking will only become more prevalent over time.

Not a bad idea on the email though.

Re: Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

#49

Post by tomp »

Spooky23 wrote: post #11

Online ads are pure garbage. 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…

> 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

Those are not ads. It's legitimate information that helps you, so you seek it out. The vast majority of ads are not informative, but rather use emotional manipulation to get you to buy stuff you don't need, or that you wouldn't buy otherwise.

Re: Rise of Ad Blocking Is the Ad Industry's Fault, Says Outgoing FTC Commissioner

#50

Post by rmc »

imgabe wrote: post #19

It would be interesting to see if someone could endow an independent publication with enough money to keep it going, then put quality ad-free journalism behind a paywall. 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 bec…

The Guardian newspaper in the UK (y'know one of the newspapers Edward Snowden reached out to), are exactly that.

Except you can read it for free online. You can consider signing up as a Guardian Member if you want to support them.

Post reply on HN