
Ad blocking “controversy” just foolishness - elialbert
http://creaturefeaturecode.blogspot.com/2015/09/ad-blocking-controversy-aka-foolishness.html
======
thomaskcr
My feeling is that the current model adds liquidity to the internet. Paywall
sites are annoying now as it is, I get frustrated when I click an interesting
title and can't read the article. I really don't see how not being able to
access huge swaths of the internet without managing your subscriptions is
better than just having ads on the screen. Ads mean you just don't need to
worry about it.

I remember seeing tons of this image (tiered internet:
[http://www.gacetadigital.com/wp-
content/2010/12/TieredIntern...](http://www.gacetadigital.com/wp-
content/2010/12/TieredInternet.jpg)) used to scare people about net neutrality
and yet this seems to be what a lot of these proposals boil down to.

The other ideas are nice, but they just add to the cost of monetizing your
content. The advantage of ad networks was not having to spend time negotiating
advertising or finding a vendor for shirts.

I think there is a compromise version of an ad-blocker that just freezes all
animation -- that seems to be the biggest complaint that can be reasonably
addressed. Privacy can be addressed by targeting ads based on the content of
the page and possibly proxying the ad content through that server so the ad
network never gets the request directly from a client. Since most ads only pay
for a click instead of a view anyway I think confirming an ad loaded is
becoming less of an issue from the other side.

~~~
tracker1
It isn't just animation, it's audio.. it's layers of iframes and tracking
scripts that slow down the rest of the page/browser/computer ... I don't
begrudge tasteful, and limited use of advertising windows on a page... the
issue is that many sites go too far beyond that.

When left to their own devices advertisers and the sites that cater to them,
most recently the clickbait article sites, will use ever more intrusive
methods of advertising. Much of which aren't easily avoidable... you see
someone post something on facebook that looks interesting, you click it,
you've already been abused, before you realize it's the same site that has
abused you in the past.

These abuses include fly over ads, popup/out actions that are all but
unavoidable, clickjacking, close filtering and more. It's not that the full-
screen ads aren't enough, but there's pervasive and invasive ads that are
disguised and integrated to look like content at first glance.

If it weren't for the bad actors in advertising we wouldn't have popup
blocking built into the browsers. And as time goes it doesn't look to me like
advertisers have learned their lesson. If Firefox wasn't such a performance
nightmare with adblock on android, I'd use it more.. if I could get uBlock
with chrome on android that would be better still.

As it stands, using my phone more has only served to increase my desire for
ad/privacy software everywhere.

------
shopinterest
The larger issue is this, the AdBlockers block 'independent ads, served via
third party services via web' Ad blockers won't block Google Ads via Android
or iOS ads in their new "news" apps. Nor it will block Facebook ads, YouTube
Ads or some in-app marketing.

So, what I think is missing in the discussion that, perhaps by flaw or
mistake, but the original sin of the web (ads) is now the currency for many
websites, apps, etc... and it maintains the small, medium and large publishers
and companies.

Ad blocking as-now targets the independent web more than anything. It will
force Advertisers to give to Google/Facebook/Apple more and basically just
suck the revenues of an industry into the hands of a handful of platform.
Content has already been centralized by force, now they want the ads as well.

People who say, 'if your content requires ads then its not worth it, or you
are in the wrong side of history, blah, blah, blah' fail to recognize how ad
monetization happens on web/apps - yes it gets annoying, but it works.
Independent sites (arts, news, etc...) like a favorite of mine ArsTechnica,
depend on Ad revenue.

Apple releasing Ad Blockers the same day their News app becomes permanent and
with Ads that cannot be blocked its not a coincidence. And that is quite a
strategic move aimed to move more ad revenue into fewer companies. I don't
know if that's the right side of history then. I hope not.

However, it's all in the defaults - 90% of online users (and I cant imagine
app users are any higher) never touch the defaults. Sure, a number of 20MM may
have downloaded adblockers online, but it is still small. But once the option
is there, one day, the iPhone7 might default to 'ad block yes' and obliterate
a mobile ad industry. No one likes to defend marketers, but moving us to a
system controlled by a few platforms is a bad idea. Say, a presidential
election could be influenced by a company deciding it won't allow ads of
candidate Y or Z etc... or Donation campaigns won't be able to afford a market
price of higher ad prices.

This is a bad idea folks.

~~~
lagadu
> Say, a presidential election could be influenced by a company deciding it
> won't allow ads of candidate Y or Z etc... or Donation campaigns won't be
> able to afford a market price of higher ad prices.

That is a perfect example of why adblocking should be on by default for
everything. It'd solve that problem instantly.

~~~
tracker1
The trouble with this... is that the functionality behind ad service (iframes,
remote content, etc) is very functionally useful... as is/was being able to
open a window. It's simply abused.

If iframes were limited to 1 layer deep in the browsers that would change a
lot, as ad networks wouldn't be able to cross-bounce for 10+ layers if iframes
each with their tracking and behavior scripts (poorly written) running in the
browser, and throwing up errors all over my console output.

For that matter, It's not unreasonable to serve ads from the origin domain...
it is very easy to do, and can cover some interesting models with
advertising... integration can come in other ways, as could server-side
integration methods. There are better ways to serve ads... the "liquidity"
mentioned in another post is generally of poor and dubious quality.

------
elialbert
long time lurker, first time poster here. curious to hear opinions on this
piece I just wrote. thanks!

~~~
oldfatslow
I despise the "wrong side of internet" argument. It feels pretty childish and
I quit reading after your TL;DR.

~~~
elialbert
you mean "wrong side of history"?

