

Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise? - hawke
http://ninjasandrobots.com/google-ive-had-enough-how-about-a-compromise

======
rglullis
I really, really don't buy the idea that I should feel bad for using adblock.
The whole "ads can be a way to provide quality services, and adblock removes
that revenue" is the marketer's equivalent to the {MP|RI}AA's "every pirate is
a stolen sale".

The whole thing with the Internet is about desintermediation, and marketing
departments are nothing but middle-men between producers and consumers. Even
worse that they actually sell the idea that producers need to "build a brand".
Zero actual value-add to the chain, but work to increase perceived and actual
costs of the goods produced.

~~~
tomkarlo
I agree with you that the MPAA claim is silly. But in this case, you're
actually consuming the product - using their bandwidth, their servers, etc,
all of which costs money - and denying them the revenue they use to support
that service. The argument with the MPAA concept is that you're not denying
them a sale, nor are you increasing their cost of doing business, but here
you're you're doing the latter.

Do you really believe that advertising (which is only part of what marketing
departments do) is "zero value-add"? How do you learn about new products? How
do you think the press who review products learn about them? How does a
product become available for your to buy at Walgreens on the corner? All of
that is "marketing"...

~~~
rglullis
The thing is, if the product is actually valuable to me, I would spend more
money on them that they could ever make from me through ads.

"But wait, what about freemium? Plenty of services remove the ads for paying
customers", one might ask. The problem with it is that you now a have false
sense of choice:

    
    
      1) Free product + ads
      2) Paid product and no ads.
    

There is a third alternative: free product, adblock, no ads.

Yes, marketing is much more than advertising. But I think that the
"advertising" part is what everything else is based on, when it shouldn't. To
take on your example, the "press who review products" is, most of the time,
dependent on eyeballs to sell ads to. This model is so broken that you either
have newspapers going bankrupt or Huffington Post-style blogs, with zero
actual content.

If enough people started using adblock, perhaps we would get to a point where
the current model would be unsustainable, which would producers to either:

    
    
      - Get rid of ad-based services and products, and start charging directly.
      - Improve their ads to make it more relevant to consumers.

~~~
tomkarlo
"There is a third alternative: free product, adblock, no ads."

By that logic, it's also possible to avoid high grocery bills by sticking some
things in your pocket and not paying for them. Just because you can do
something doesn't mean it's a scalable or ethical option.

Google's core breakthrough in advertising was to close the loop and push
advertisers towards ads that are relevant to customers, where they know
exactly how much they're earning per dollar they spend on ads. Ads have,
actually, improved quite a bit over the past 10 years. The famous line was
"half of ad spending is wasted, we just don't know which half"
(paraphrased)... now they know which half.

To go back to the OP's subject - the reason why retargeting has grown so
popular is that it WORKS LIKE A MOFO. Retargeted ads are usually an order of
magnitude more relevant and are immensely cost effective in terms of spend
versus conversions. The best indicator that someone's interested in buying a
Ford? They visited the Ford site.

~~~
rglullis
If using adblock is unethical, so is torrenting TV shows; and I thought you
agreed with me that the MPAA claim is bullshit.

Google is better than the alternatives, sure. It doesn't mean that it is any
good. The ads I get on my cell phone are still awful, to the point of
discouraging me to use it more.

~~~
storborg
It's not contradictory to agree that the MPAA's "every pirate is a stolen
sale" claim is bullshit, but still think that torrenting TV shows is
unethical.

Some may believe that the ethical choice is just to not watch that TV show.

~~~
niels_olson
> Some may believe that the ethical choice is just to not watch that TV show.

Here's my dilemma: I don't own a TV, I can't be bothered to even try to
download, let alone watch. I tried with The Wire, it became a suffering labor
to t trough it, no matter how interesting. Mad Men? Good luck. I have no time.

------
ben1040
I had no idea retargeting even was a thing, until one particular ad kept
repeatedly showing up.

When my grandmother died last year we looked up the website for a cremation
service to find their phone number. Then for the next week or so I kept seeing
banner ads for the same cremation service all over the web, on completely
unrelated sites.

I would expect to see a cremation service ad on an obituary page, maybe a
local newspaper, etc. I would not expect to see it on, say, a tech blog or an
Android user forum. And I could consistently refresh threads on that forum and
keep seeing that particular ad from that same company. Maybe it was the nature
of the service advertised and my frame of mind at the time I was seeing it,
but I was really creeped out.

I cleared cookies and it stopped. At that point I realized that the advertiser
was doing something in particular to tell Google that I visited their site and
to start throwing ads at me elsewhere. I checked out the AdWords docs to see
how they were doing this and figure out how to opt out.

I don't know how long this has been a service offered by Google. Up until that
one instance I likely had countless ads retargeted at me, and I may have even
clicked such ads. And it works great until one instance where I'm creeped the
heck out and I push back.

~~~
dasil003
When it started happening to me I was more or less indifferent other than to
think: "why are they showing me an endless stream of ads for things I'm
already a customer of?". I have more disposable income, so show me something
new ferchrissakes.

~~~
ben1040
That's another case I saw it. A year and a half ago I bought a cruise ticket
from Holland America, and next thing I know I'm seeing Holland America ads
across the internet.

At the time I thought they were just doing an ad blitz, because it was the
time of year when people plan vacations for the summer ahead and might
consider going on cruises. In hindsight it seems silly for them to spend money
displaying ads to me, when I've already paid (a substantial sum of money) for
their product.

It wasn't until the funeral service ads that I realized I was being targeted
for having visited specific websites.

------
vladd
Google allows you to manage your ads preferences at:

<http://www.google.com/ads/preferences/>

Retargeting is basically disabled if one opts out there (for the web,
search&gmail or both).

~~~
getpost
I checked that link, and Google's profile of me is way off. Earth Sciences?
Seriously? This is a comfort, since I figure letting the system run on bad
information is just fine. It does suggest that Google isn't using some
information it has on me. I'm sure it knows my birth year, but my browsing
habits seem to suggest someone much younger. I must be 'immature.'

~~~
vibrunazo
It put my inferred age as 65+ years old, when I'm 29. I'm not sure what to
make of that, other than google is much worse at this than I thought they were
^^

------
loumf
On google ads (at least Display ads), there's this little triangle in the
corner with plenty of opt-out options. More info here:

[http://support.google.com/adsense/bin/static.py?hl=en&gl...](http://support.google.com/adsense/bin/static.py?hl=en&gl=US&ts=1631343&page=ts.cs)

------
shinratdr
Internet advertising is always at the forefront of the shadiest practices. I'm
not about to constantly monitor it. Either the industry reforms or I have
AdBlock on forever.

~~~
Karunamon
So very much this. My time is worth more than you could possibly charge per
impression/click when one of your shady ad networks gives me some form of
malware.

Until ad network administrators take responsibility for what's being shown
under their name, adblock stays on.

------
alecbenzer
It's funny that Hulu is supposed to have that "This ad isn't relevant" button
to do exactly what he's describing (er, doing, I guess), but it doesn't seem
to be effective for me at all.

~~~
reginaldo
Depending on what I watch, I get only cars, cell phones, foundations, and of
course 5-hour energy.

I've always thought that this is because they don't have any other advertisers
for that particular show. Like "this ad is not relevant but it's the only one
we have so we'll show it to you anyway".

------
notjustanymike
Pro-tip: look for the triangle in the top right of the ad. Usually clicking on
it will provide an option for opting out, although it doesn't appear on all
ads.

------
12uu45dd
Now, let's be serious. If we all block ads, whic is really trivial to do, then
the web would cease to be an important medium, the quality of content found
through the web would drop sharply and our lives would lose the enrichment
that online advertising brings. It would just be terrible. Don't block ads. A
kitten is tortured everytime you do.

~~~
petercooper
I think you have your tongue in cheek, but I'm going to bite because I have
something to say even if you're not being serious ;-)

I'm an online publisher who has a significant percentage of income that comes
via advertising and I think ad blocking is a _good_ force for the Web. I don't
use it, but I don't have a problem with those who do.

Ad blockers typically block poorly performing display advertising (the CTRs on
banners nowadays is ridiculously low and the levels of recall have been shown
to be abysmally low in studies) and text link advertising from the big
networks.

Ad blockers typically do _not_ block 'content marketing', videos on sites like
YouTube, editorial mentions of products, references to products and services
_within_ content, adverts in podcasts, job ads (usually), sponsors in e-mail
newsletters, and a whole myriad of other ways that smart advertisers and
publishers are using.

It's about time we killed off mass market display advertising online. Why?
Because it gives publishers an incentive to actually work to provide
experiences that benefit both readers and advertisers and not sit on their fat
asses collecting checks for doing sod all.

~~~
jsnell
I'm not sure I understand. Moving from obvious ads to "editorial mentions of
products" and "references to products and services within content" is supposed
to be an improvement of some sort? To me those seem like just about the
sleaziest kind of advertising there is.

~~~
petercooper
As with many things, it depends on how it's done. If there's no disclosure and
editorial keeps referring to certain products or companies without any
implication of a relationship, that's just payola. Sadly, there are plenty of
outlets and magazines that are suspected of or have been caught doing this.

Increasingly, though, reputable media organizations are doing collaborations
with brands, such as with merchandise, pull outs, giveaways, or in clearly
marked 'products we like' sections (essentially advertising as content - super
popular in fashion and women's magazines). It's a rapidly spreading model in
the magazine space in particular. Monocle magazine is one of the exemplary
examples - [http://www.reallypractical.com/2009/07/06/is-monocle-the-
fut...](http://www.reallypractical.com/2009/07/06/is-monocle-the-future-of-
publishing-and-content-marketing/)

The big traffic/small CPM model is still too lucrative online for the bigger
online publishers to spend too much time on the newer ideas, but the hands of
other media have been forced by tumbling revenues and, in a funny twist, are
becoming more progressive.

On quality, though, the readership will ultimately vote with their feet (or
clicks) - outlets that fall into the payola trap will suffer audience drops
and legal trouble, outlets that transparently entertain or inform their
readership in _conjunction_ with advertisers will thrive (as Monocle is).

Separate from pairing up with media outlets, many advertisers are now going
'direct' to audiences with content-driven campaigns (not just videos, but
entire content sites). Digitally prodigious companies and startups have been
doing this for ages with blogs and the like, but the approach is now becoming
mainstream and being taken on by the big brands.

Ad blockers are next to useless on all of this but, IMHO, the end result is
better. Outlets and brands have to start telling interesting stories and
sharing interesting content, instead of tricking us into clicking graphics and
becoming leads.

------
joejohnson
That "Kudos" meter in the top right corner is inaccurate. I moused-over the
black circle before I realized what it did, and it counted my "vote" anyway.

~~~
nate
I'll make sure to remember that you'd like to take away the praise and honor
you bestowed upon me for my achievement. :)

------
rogerbinns
Don't ever make the mistake of looking up medical conditions you see on a show
like House. You will forever be plagued by ads trying to address your
condition!

~~~
Teapot
Hey, at least you get to pick your ads. :P Btw, a simple search for anything
geeky gets me tons of dating ads. (i havent installed adblock on my Opera
test-browser). Pics of smiling chicks may be preferred over ugly medical
conditions.

------
thelastknowngod
You should check out Collusion: <http://www.makeuseof.com/dir/collusion-who-
is-tracking-you/>

Then install TrackerBlock: <https://addons.mozilla.org/en-
US/firefox/addon/trackerblock/>

~~~
RexM
What's funny is you post the link to makeuseof.com which seems to be one of
the worse offenders. For a direct link, <http://collusion.toolness.org/>

------
sparkie
Google only gives me ads for products I've already bought. I'm not sure which
genius thought that kind of targeted advertising was a good idea.

Perhaps if I used gmail, so they could read my emails and see what I've bought
already, I wouldn't have this problem. I'll pass on that idea though.

~~~
EvilTerran
Using gmail only makes it worse, as far as I can tell. I don't get the
impression they pick your emails apart enough to distinguish between "bought
this" and just "looking at this". I guess there's also the chance that, say,
after buying a Frobnitz, you'll want to visit a Frobnitz-seller's website to
buy accessories.

------
mephi5t0
I have another addon instead: ad-block in Google Chrome. No problems at all.
Sometimes I need it disabled for work, so I also have 3rd party cookies
disabled. This way even if I come to coca-cola site I will not see it
everywhere :)

------
polshaw
I had this happen recently with airbnb.. I went to check out prices in a city,
and decided youth hostels offered better value for the situation so left.

Virtually every single website i visited for a week was shoving airbnb in my
face. Yes, i know you exist, i went there.

There has to be more complexity to the 'rule of 7' because i'm sure there must
be better sales patterns than just shoving 7 ads in a row for the same thing
at you. The same thing happens with comedy central's online shows.. _every
time_ the same ad-- it just makes me hate the product after the first few
times.

------
kayge
The author briefly picks on Hulu's advertising methods, but I have actually
been fairly pleased with their AdTailor(?) service. I don't see female-
targetted ads anymore, and there has been a definite increase in advertising
for products/services I might be interested in. It does still seem like there
are a disproportionate amount of Insurance ads shown, and I'm not sure if
that's because Insurance Companies have more advertising dollars, or because I
have limited the pool of potential ad "archetypes" to show by using the
AdTailor.

~~~
toemetoch
I can relate to his frustration re Hulu ads. Discovery Channel (here in
Europe) advertises mostly for their own programs - often for the program
you're actually watching. The remainder is for a handful of companies.
Clueless about why they'd do that.

------
Digit-Al
Last year I visited a site to do with laser eye surgery. I was then subjected
to ads for laser eye surgery for 3 or 4 months, even after I had surgery and
was definitely not going to be buying the service again.

This gave me an idea for how to prank a friend if they leave you alone with
their computer for a short while. Just visit loads of sites for an
embarrassing subject (maybe haemorrhoids, vaginal rash, penis enlargement,
etc...) They will then be subjected to ads for that subject for months after,
with no idea why :-)

------
RobAtticus
ESPN3 and NBC Sports online are SO bad at showing the same two commercials at
every single break. I assume its because nobody wants to spend their money on
ads only to have them shown online, but damn. I must've seen that "We just had
a Journey moment there" ad a thousand times while watching college basketball
this winter. It doesn't help that they have some annoying catchphrase that
stands out or high-pitched sound/song to up its annoyance factor.

Something really, really needs to be done about this.

------
cnbeuiwx
Why do people even trust ads? Why would I pick a certain brand just because I
see it over and over? Wouldnt someone intelligent just do 5 minutes of
googling to find out which one is the best?

Not to mention that I think it grabs my attention from what Im trying to do
and redirects it into me wanting to buy a product all of a sudden. No.

Proud Adblock user ever since it came.

------
pilot_pirx
Companies are lucky if I use AdBlock, because my personal "Rule of 7" states
that company adds I see more than 7 times make this company an automatic
member of the "annoying company list" (Adds that blink or play sound (hear me
coka cola?)) are immediate candidates.

------
bartl
Every other ad I see on YouTube is from Native Instruments. No, actually, it's
more than half of the ads. I'm getting very tired of it.

------
socceruci
Statics have shown that showing an ad every other day for a month is more
effective than any more often.

------
robomartin
Aren't you just angry because your girlfriend keeps seeing that penile
enlargement ad every time she uses your computer? It sure bothers me!

All kidding aside, I'd say that the minute you start paying for Google's
search engine, email, docs and other services you are automatically entitled
to them blocking ads from AdSense-powered sites. Until then I can't see how
someone can complain given the value received. Fair trade.

------
recoiledsnake
A couple of months ago, I searched for online stock brokerages and visited a
couple of sites. For next few weeks, ALL is saw was online brokerage ads
whichever site I went, from my home machine and laptop to my office machine.
It was really irritating.

~~~
oinksoft
I think this is why many people nowadays use ad blockers like AdBlock Plus,
and tracking blockers like Ghostery.

