Web Developers

Ad Blocking Is Generally Evil

Posted by on Mar 5, 2010 | 4 Comments

The silly idea that somehow ad blocking is just not that bad is insane. As this article accurately outlines as clear as day, you are basically trying to get something for nothing. Now to be fair to readers tired of having their browsers crashed by poorly done Flash ads, this is something that needs to be addressed as well. Flash ads need to stop, really. They’re killing us, making us want to get our content elsewhere.

But the fact of the matter is that those who are catering to tech driven sites are being hurt by folks who are using ad blocking add-ons. It’s simply not helping anyone. Clearly, there needs to be some common ground where browsers are not being crashed by Flash ads yet at the same time, not having ad revenue taking a hit, either. So what is the solution?

To be honest, I am not entirely sure I have a quick fix to this myself. On the one hand, I can see the value of blocking problematic advertisements. But still, taking away revenue from a site that you visit frequently is pretty sleazy as well. Perhaps ad-free subscriptions are the answer? First view is free, pay the subscription afterward?

[awsbullet:magazine subscription]

  • http://www.chrisdpratt.com Chris Pratt

    The problem isn’t ads or ad-blockers; the problem is the entire ad model when applied to the web. Simply, it just doesn’t work.

    The typical stance of advertisers and content authors online is that people who block ads are evil because they’re “stealing” content. However, there’s many legitimate reasons to block ads. Many of us are spoiled by our broadband internet connections, but there’s countless people even in modern countries and especially in developing countries where access is limited. Wasting bits on bloated flash and image ads is simply not acceptable. There’s more simplistic reasons as well. Advertisements, by their nature, are meant to attract attention. That’s fine for something like TV or radio where the content is suspended during ad-time, but for textual content on the web (by itself not the most readable of mediums), it only makes a bad situation worse.

    The best solution is the one already being realized by many blogs online: you use content to drive traffic, but you generate revenue through added value. A news site could offer more in-depth coverage of a particular story with extra video content, etc., for a subscription. Tech sites can offer thorough tutorials, reports, software, etc. In just about any category, there are added value features that could be sold while not severely limiting content. These avenues also generate far greater revenue and visitor loyalty, as well, because they have actual value and do not hinder the user’s experience like ads do.

    With all that said, it also deserves to be pointed out yet again that the people who block ads, are not going to be clicking ads were they actually shown. So, as a content author, at best, you’re losing nothing, and at worst you’re scamming the advertisers.

  • CA Russell

    In short: Seeing your add does not mean I will click on it.

    I learn about products through other means. Online adds do not work for me. I don’t even see them anymore even without the blocking software. The blocking software makes navigating websites easier (faster, more secure, etc).

    About a pay-wall to content:
    I like your content but not enough to pay you directly for your opinions. Give me a reason to buy a scarce product that I want and I will. Opinions are not a scarce products. Neither are facts (hint to newspaper sites).

    No one is entitled to get paid just for putting their product out in the market. You have an audience. The question you must answer is how to give that audience a reason to buy. And no, you are not entitled to their money just because you have managed to catch their attention. Catching their attention was the first step. Now you have to do something with it.

    Sounds like relying on them to click on advertisements for products you don’t sell personally doesn’t work.

    How you can earn a living doing what you love is a problem only you can solve. Asking your readers to solve that for you is unfair.

  • http://nyet Greg Ausburn

    I put up (and enjoy TV adds) for a good laugh.

  • http://blog.ithomasina.com iThomasina

    Huh. Blocking ads has never occurred to me. But I did have a few thoughts:

    1. By inference, I would assume that people who fast forward or otherwise skip TV commercials are likewise “stealing” content?

    2. Anyone who would go so far as to block ads is not the type of person who would have clicked on them anyway. Therefore, no loss of revenue is apparent.

    3. While I’ve never blocked ads, I have definitely left sites when I found the ads simply too intrusive. If they are flashing, blinking, too hard to distinguish from actual content, have an audio component, or are otherwise obnoxiously distracting I move on to another site. And I certainly don’t reward the behavior by clicking on the ads.

    While I don’t disagree with the ethical issues related to ad blocking, I have to say that it seems to me that any website or blog that exists simply to support it’s ads is doomed to failure anyway. That is not to say that ANY website that uses these ads is doomed to failure, only that those websites whose WHOLE purpose is simply to draw attention to the ads rather than creating/sharing something of value are intrinsically flawed.