Publishers Are Rethinking Those ‘Around the Web’ Ads • Hacker News Board

Re: Publishers Are Rethinking Those ‘Around the Web’ Ads

#91

Post by nucleardog » Mon, Oct 31, 2016, 11:49 PM UTC

a3n wrote: post #86

gregmac wrote: post #19

These ads specifically were the ads that drove me to ad blockers. I resisted for years, as I took the stance I simply didn't visit sites that had overly obnoxious ads. I've had flash turned off for years so that likely cut down on a lot of that garbage anyway. Then these fake "Other things you might like" ads started appearing around many sites. Occasionally somewhat relevant, but always click-bait headlines. I was e…

Even without these types of ads, mere performance compels me to use an ad blocker. I've recently been playing around with different Linux distros, and so installed Firefox multiple times if it wasn't already there. I'm the type of person who queues up a number of tabs for reading. At the NYT, at about four or five tabs open, the laptop becomes unusable, because of all the ad downloading. And now, the absolute first t…

I'm not one of those people that actively does much about ads or online privacy. I have friends that obsess over the stuff and probably spend as much time as I do online just adjusting custom uBlock/whatever else lists.

But I finally switched off of Chrome on Android and over to Firefox where I could install uBlock because of these fucking Taboola ads. Trying to read sites and the entire page would be jumping around as my phone slowly struggled its way into loading and displaying them.

Sorry, ad industry, I'm not going to take the time to weed out the bad actors. As soon as you annoy me enough that I feel I need to do something I'm taking the nuclear option and blocking everything - it's just easier.

Re: Publishers Are Rethinking Those ‘Around the Web’ Ads

#92

Post by 627467 » Mon, Oct 31, 2016, 11:59 PM UTC

I keep asking: if you're a serious publisher, shouldn't it be your job to create/curate the right content for your readership? Isn't it your job to know your readers? Leaving screen real-estate (and really substantial amount) to random third party algorithms who most likely than not will be spamming my eyes with unrelated and sensationalist content is disrespectful.

Re: Publishers Are Rethinking Those ‘Around the Web’ Ads

#93

Post by prawn » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 1:29 AM UTC

reitanqild wrote: post #39

manicdee wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And at least Google iAds give you the tiny little logo in the corner for you to click so you can report the ad that tries very hard to look like a download button :(

Only they never seem to quite get it: Google: here is x dating site, Me: click, mark as irrelevant. Google: here is y dating site Me: irrelevant Google: z dating site? Me: nope Google: lets try an ad for x dating site again then Me: actually, you got my mail, all my searches for the last 10 years and still you cannot find anything more relevant for a happily married sw engineer?

I think they just have a weak pool of ads to serve. I routinely mark Twitter ads as of no interest to me, and still get virtually nothing I would ever have interest in.

Re: Publishers Are Rethinking Those ‘Around the Web’ Ads

#94

Post by inimino » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 1:13 PM UTC

davemel37 wrote: post #77

inimino wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think native ads will find their place and be a net positive for the internet... I am curious how you see this happening. To me these ads are an embarrassment to the human species. The language you use suggests that you and I may live in entirely different universes.

The underlying idea of promoting content natively while reading other content is a better user experience than other advertising and can democratize smaller publishers (with laser targeted relevancy placement opportunities) and brands reaching consumers in a very engaging and relevant way for consumers. Whats missing today are two ingredients. 1. better policing of the advertisers/quality and relevancy scores like Go…

I think advertising has some good and necessary uses in alerting consumers to legitimate value propositions. It also can encourage people to do things that are not in their best interest, for example to drink either Pepsi or Coke, or to use tobacco products before their advertising was widely banned.

So I would separate advertisements into good (new restaurant near you that you would like to know about) and bad (preying on human weaknesses). Which one is this kind of ad best suited for?

> providing value to users will maximize revenues.

I'm not so sure.

The "chumbox" ads seem to be literally all bad, selling things with net negative utility.

What are the socially valuable uses for this that are going to outcompete miracle pills and snake oil?

Re: Publishers Are Rethinking Those ‘Around the Web’ Ads

#95

Post by eropple » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 4:26 PM UTC

posterboy wrote: post #90

eropple wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh. It's open source. I built it from source myself.

wat. that wasn't obvious from the comment.

Google "block-this". First result: "Block This - Open Source Ad Blocker".

Re: Publishers Are Rethinking Those ‘Around the Web’ Ads

#96

Post by posterboy » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 7:06 PM UTC

eropple wrote: post #95

posterboy wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wat. that wasn't obvious from the comment.

Google "block-this". First result: "Block This - Open Source Ad Blocker".

Yes, sure, I am going to search something on the off chance of it being an open source project, because someone on the internet said it, who doesn't even go with the good practice of including a link. Or, you know, I could express myself, inform you of the impression you've left on me, and provoke the answer to read for anyone, instead of finding it for myself. I'll admit in hindsight, either approach seems somewhat improvable.