
Ask HN: Should I feel bad for using an Ad Blocker? - dufferzafar
I&#x27;ve been using and Ad blocker ever since I&#x27;ve known about them. Previously it was Ad Block, but I now use uBlock Origin.<p>I was just reading an article on Wired when I noticed this [0], which got me thinking, should I whitelist them?<p>I felt I should, and if them, why not other sites?<p>The only way sites earn is by ads right, so If I like their content and don&#x27;t view ads, am I &#x27;cheating&#x27;?<p>[0] : http:&#x2F;&#x2F;i.imgur.com&#x2F;MwkiyO1.png
======
sp332
If their "monetization strategy" is so annoying (or insecure, which is another
legitimate reason to block ad networks) that you're disabling parts of your
browser to work around it, then their business model is broken and you
shouldn't feel bad about it.

Wired in particular has a print magazine which is mostly funded by print ads,
and they are owned by Advance Publications which did $8B in revenue last year
so I wouldn't worry about them too much.

------
tmoullet
Do you feel bad for DVRing a tv show and then using the skip button to bypass
commercials?

------
Zekio
Never feel bad for not wasting CPU and Bandwidth(video ads ugh)

~~~
ljk
Especially auto-playing videos ads, and the sites that force you to disable ad
blockers.

------
Mz
Maybe, maybe not. There are other ways to support sites and site monetization
is complicated. If you value what they do and you use the site, you should
find some means to support it, if possible. But it isn't all on your shoulders
either.

You should strive to support the things you benefit from and not just be a
leech. But it also isn't an offense that merits committing hara kiri either.

I say this as someone who runs a number of sites that don't really make money.
I do have a notice that says "Thank you for white listing," but the general
lack of financial success of my work is far more complicated than "You evil ad
block users killed my monetization!"

If it bothers you enough to ask, consider coming up with some thoughtful
personal policy that makes you more comfortable than what you are doing
currently.

------
Nadya
_> The only way sites earn is by ads right, so If I like their content and
don't view ads, am I 'cheating'?_

Featured posts, donations, merchandise, subscriptions, pay-per-use (paywall),
sponsors.

I took the better approach, which is also more fair for them: I don't visit
them at all.

It also depends if they get paid per ad impression or ad click. Though I don't
think ad-clicks are common nowadays.

Not visiting their site has the same result, but is more "morally acceptable"
for not using server resources. I don't agree with ads on principle - and an
ad asking me to remove my ad blocker is still an ad.

~~~
dufferzafar
> I don't visit them at all.

I honestly don't get this part. You don't visit any website that has ads?

~~~
Nadya
I don't (intentionally, at least) visit any site that has an ad for users who
use ad blockers to disable their ad blocker.

I do this because, to me, it is implied they would rather not have me visiting
if I do not white list them. Which is reasonable and understandable if ads are
their main business model.

If it is merely a request but they explicitly state that continued use of the
site with your ad blocker active is OK, I'll continue use of the site.

E:

I went off on a tangent. Removed the unnecessary bits.

------
anonyfox
see [http://blog.plague-dev.de/posts/Adblock-isnt-immoral](http://blog.plague-
dev.de/posts/Adblock-isnt-immoral) .

------
Myk267
Only if you would feel bad that the sites you visit with your ad blocker
enabled all died because they didn't get enough funding.

------
redxblood
Nope. It´s your choice to use one.

