• 132 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Posted by granderojo (1792 posts) -

Alright so I pay for a lot of content on the internet. I pay for Giantbomb, Comicvine, New York Times, Udemy, PC Gamer, Instapaper, The Atlantic, Netflix among others that I forget but I'm sure I still pay for regularly. I would to the rest of my regular websites if it meant they offered a model with no ads. I don't care that I use ad block on websites. I don't subscribe to cable for this reason and when I did I used a DVR to skip ads along with the ability to consume content on my time. This doesn't make me a bad person, and I'm not stealing money from content creators.

That's my stance on the issue what's yours?

Remember:

#2 Edited by Jace (1093 posts) -

I see no problem with adblock, and I do have income from web advertisements.

Edit: I want to add something to my post because I see a lot of ignorance in this thread arguing from both perspectives.

People who choose to make web advertisements a source of income are not lowly, scum, thieves, etc. And more often than not, if they're even remotely successful, the ad revenue isn't a large piece of their pie. Generally, ad revenue is not a primary concern. However, these people also realize adblockers exist. I don't know anyone who makes direct income from ads who thinks consumers should be obligated, morally or otherwise, to expose themselves to their ad.

I could make a huge post on it, but the short version is this:

If you feel you want to block ads, fine. It means the web ad industry will have to adapt or collapse. Webmasters are not at fault for using ads, and consumers are not at fault for blocking them. Any other argument is beyond invalid.

#3 Posted by HatKing (6059 posts) -

I'm willing to hear the arguments from website creators why I shouldn't use it. But until somebody makes an argument that's not 'hey, you're taking our money away', I doubt I'll be removing ad block. Most internet advertisements are invasive, deceptive, and annoying. Giant Bomb isn't immune to the shitty ones either. Until the problems with internet advertising are addressed, I have zero interest in putting up with them.

#4 Posted by Weltal (2274 posts) -

I remove Ad-Block on a case by case basis; if the site is one which I love, like Giant Bomb, I'll pay for the ability to remove ads and support it. Even if I love a site though I'm not going to turn Ad-Blocker off if they have awful advertisement polices (Pop-ups, audio advertisements and the like), that's something they need to correct and not the visitors responsibility.

#6 Posted by Zomgfruitbunnies (854 posts) -

Personal preference issue.

I Adblock all day, everyday. I'll turn off Adblock the day one can no longer get malware from shitty ads/scripts.

#7 Posted by Trainer_Red (314 posts) -

They don't get paid unless you actually click on the ad, so I see no point in making yourself suffer unless you actually click on them. (at least on Youtube anyways)

#8 Posted by CaptainThunderpants (79 posts) -

@Trainer_Red said:

They don't get paid unless you actually click on the ad, so I see no point in making yourself suffer unless you actually click on them. (at least on Youtube anyways)

That's not accurate.

#9 Posted by Counterclockwork87 (733 posts) -

You see I've never felt this way about ads...I don't have adblock simply because ads do not bother me. I'm not impatient I can wait through a 30 second ad its not the end of the world...I don't get the hate.

#10 Posted by mlarrabee (3029 posts) -

I'd rather pay for something directly than endure ads. I subscribe to the sites I use regularly that offer subscriptions, and I block the ads on those that don't.

I think that causes less income to go to those who want to continue pasting products on my screen and causes more to go to those who have a proper business model.

If I can, in this small way, encourage web masters to go from wild, wasteland tactics into a world where cost enforces quality, I'll do it, even if it involves more negative reenforcement than positive.

#11 Posted by CaptainThunderpants (79 posts) -

@thabigred said:

Alright so I pay for a lot of content on the internet. I pay for Giantbomb, Comicvine, New York Times, Udemy, PC Gamer, Instapaper, The Atlantic, Netflix among others that I forget but I'm sure I still pay for regularly. I would to the rest of my regular websites if it meant they offered a model with no ads.

I couldn't resist.

#12 Posted by JordanK85 (140 posts) -

Ads that install malware on your computer, as well as perform other nefarious acts, give the rest of internet advertising a bad name. There are no television ads that harm your TV set just by viewing them so to say that Internet ads are the same as TV ads is a false equivalency. No user would accept a value proposition where the website owner offers their content for free as long as they have permission to harm your computer. If ad blockers ever get made illegal then it's only fair that malicious ads are also made illegal but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

#13 Posted by CaptainThunderpants (79 posts) -

@JordanK85 said:

Ads that install malware on your computer, as well as perform other nefarious acts, give the rest of internet advertising a bad name. There are no television ads that harm your TV set just by viewing them so to say that Internet ads are the same as TV ads is a false equivalency. No user would accept a value proposition where the website owner offers their content for free as long as they have permission to harm your computer. If ad blockers ever get made illegal then it's only fair that malicious ads are also made illegal but I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

I think it's far more likely that ad blockers would sooner be made illegal. Also in a legal sense, "malicious" is a fairly loose term.

#14 Edited by granderojo (1792 posts) -

@CaptainThunderpants: Why did you delete the comment where you called most people who complain about ad block whiners? Is it because all the people complaining about ad block had level headed responses, and you were the one shitting up this thread with spam?

#15 Posted by CaptainThunderpants (79 posts) -

Why did I delete it? 'Casue I realized after I posted it that it wasn't a constructive post and I felt like a jerk. Sorry.

#16 Posted by supertuna (82 posts) -

Why would you use AdBlock? Don't you want to meet single girls in your area?

#17 Posted by Milkman (17173 posts) -

I used to be pretty anti-AdBlock but I eventually just reached a breaking point. There is just too much shitty and obnoxious advertising on the internet. I guess I feel kind of bad about it but I think websites should feel kind of bad about the stupid fucking "eye-blasters" or whatever they paste all over their sites. It's even a problem here. During today's live streams, there were a bunch of people in chat complaining that they couldn't see the video because they were waiting for an ad to load on Twitch TV's side of things. After using AdBlock for a while now, I couldn't imagine going back and having to watch some bullshit advertisement before every single YouTube video that I watch or something like that.

#18 Posted by granderojo (1792 posts) -

@CaptainThunderpants said:

Why did I delete it? 'Casue I realized after I posted it that it wasn't a constructive post and I felt like a jerk. Sorry.

Well then let me respond to your previous links.

@CaptainThunderpants said:

http://fishingboatproceeds.tumblr.com/post/23574506310/hank-greens-tumblr-on-ad-block

http://youtu.be/i_SVd927h0I?t=1m49s

The second vlogger doesn't seem to understand the fact that there are alternative avenues for content providers to gain revenue, a fact the first vlogger brings up. The entire concept of Giantbomb's subscription service is centered around the idea that they don't want a third party getting between them and their customer. It was successful enough that they got CBS interested, despite the saucy relationship some of their current employees may have with the organization.

I would pay for youtube. I would pay for a lot of websites. But when I have the ability to not be sold to, I'm opting out. I'm not saying Ad block is the answer, but it's the tool I have to stop evasion.

I have an extensive list of exceptions. The only ads I block are evasive ones, which are legion on certain corners of the internet. I stopped going to the HuffPost entirely because of their invasive ad that pops up now taking up the entire page.

#19 Edited by CaptainThunderpants (79 posts) -

The problem with YouTube specifically is that it is simply too big for a payment system to be effective. The amount of partners they pay is growing so your payment would be worth less and less to the point where you paying would be meaningless. Having an ad-based system, for the partners, is a far superior system where the amount of money they get from Google and advertisers varies directly with their performance. I understand that YOU can afford to go ala-carte with what you see and pay but the reality is that the majority of internet users cannot (hence the Mr. Moneybags joke). The internet is a tube for universal access, not a Sam's Club membership.

If you're really that concerned about invasion of privacy, there are many tools that block tracking. Ironically (as far as I know at least) AdBlock is not one of them. Advertisers still collect your information, it's just you don't see the end result.

Edit: Whoops, I confused evasive and invasive when reading your reply.

#20 Posted by SpartanHoplite (388 posts) -

Screen is much cleaner and loads faster without all the useless ads.

#21 Posted by JonathanAshleyMoore (283 posts) -

I personally don't use Ad-Block. I'm not smart enough to articulate why, but I'm sure somewhere down the line it is hurting the websites I use regularly and care about, even if it is by such a small fraction. So no, I don't personally, but I don't give a shit if others do.

#22 Posted by Clonedzero (4200 posts) -

i use adblocker, i dont feel bad about it.

ads are annoying and distracting. its an easy way of getting rid of annoyance in my life without any downside to me. its not my responsibility to worry about the financial well being of websites i like. i have enough advertisements shoved down my throat on a daily basis just living in america, if i can lessen that i will.

i used a friends computer not too long ago who didnt use an ad blocker. i visited alot of my favorite sites only to be disgusted by the ads (including giantbomb though this was awhile ago, i hear its gotten better but meh). i can't really imagine going back really. the experience of having the internet without ads being shoved down your throat every second is amazing. i installed adblocker for her and told her, she was amazed by it lol.

internet ads are horrible. im sorry, but its not my problem, i have enough problems in real life, i dont need to worry about that if i can avoid it with a simple browser script.

#23 Edited by CaptainThunderpants (79 posts) -

@Clonedzero said:

i use adblocker, i dont feel bad about it.

ads are annoying and distracting. its an easy way of getting rid of annoyance in my life without any downside to me. its not my responsibility to worry about the financial well being of websites i like. i have enough advertisements shoved down my throat on a daily basis just living in america, if i can lessen that i will.

i used a friends computer not too long ago who didnt use an ad blocker. i visited alot of my favorite sites only to be disgusted by the ads (including giantbomb though this was awhile ago, i hear its gotten better but meh). i can't really imagine going back really. the experience of having the internet without ads being shoved down your throat every second is amazing. i installed adblocker for her and told her, she was amazed by it lol.

internet ads are horrible. im sorry, but its not my problem, i have enough problems in real life, i dont need to worry about that if i can avoid it with a simple browser script.

So you don't care that without those ads that the stuff you like would either go away or be hidden by a paywall?

#24 Posted by CaLe (4039 posts) -

Ads on the internet are stupidly obnoxious and deserve to be blocked.

#25 Posted by TyCobb (1976 posts) -

Ad-Block forever!

I have 0 intentions to ever click on an Ad and since almost all ad revenue is generated by the Pay-Per-Click process, I don't see the harm. Am I evil for using a blocker? No need to answer because I will continue to use a blocker. I am still jaded by Pop-Ups and Pop-Unders years ago. Perhaps if those never existed, I wouldn't have 0 tolerance for ads.

#26 Posted by Clonedzero (4200 posts) -

@CaptainThunderpants said:

@Clonedzero said:

i use adblocker, i dont feel bad about it.

ads are annoying and distracting. its an easy way of getting rid of annoyance in my life without any downside to me. its not my responsibility to worry about the financial well being of websites i like. i have enough advertisements shoved down my throat on a daily basis just living in america, if i can lessen that i will.

i used a friends computer not too long ago who didnt use an ad blocker. i visited alot of my favorite sites only to be disgusted by the ads (including giantbomb though this was awhile ago, i hear its gotten better but meh). i can't really imagine going back really. the experience of having the internet without ads being shoved down your throat every second is amazing. i installed adblocker for her and told her, she was amazed by it lol.

internet ads are horrible. im sorry, but its not my problem, i have enough problems in real life, i dont need to worry about that if i can avoid it with a simple browser script.

So you don't care that without those ads that the stuff you like would either go away or be hidden by a paywall?

like i said. there are bigger things for me to worry about in my life. if a website i like goes away, that sucks, but life goes on. like i said, their financial well-being is not my responsibility, if their entire business plan is ruined by a two step install browsers script, then well. thats not my problem. sucks but thats life.

internet ads got to the point where i felt i had to completely block them. because if i rolled my mouse past them it'd pop up a super loud video trailer for some stupid crap, or it's pop ups or other crap. sorry. i'm not going to deal with that, and im not going to sit around "testing" the ads on websites to see if i can tolerate them.

ive gotten viruses from internet ads in the past so yeah, if i can avoid them i will.

#27 Posted by SlashDance (1839 posts) -

Any site that forces ads down my throat is getting adblocked, but I try to turn it off on sites I want to support.

#28 Posted by CaptainThunderpants (79 posts) -

@SlashDance: What's your definition of "shoved down your throat"?

#29 Posted by xMEGADETHxSLY (446 posts) -

Seeing no ADS or useless random fucking pop ups is a great feeling. If i like what i see i'll buy a t shirt or something. When i see another person not using ad block i see the AD fucked page filled with shit you never need.

#30 Edited by SlashDance (1839 posts) -

@CaptainThunderpants said:

@SlashDance: What's your definition of "shoved down your throat"?

Pop-ups, flash ads that cover up the screen (finding the "close" button on these is always fun), stuff like that.

#31 Posted by solidlife (883 posts) -

I would turn off Adblock for GB but there is a bug atm where videos will not load on the site for me without using adblock. Please fix

#32 Posted by CaptainThunderpants (79 posts) -

@SlashDance: Fair enough.

#33 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

Adblock everything apart from Youtube, Giant Bomb and Tested

#34 Posted by Xymox (2111 posts) -

@Weltal said:

I remove Ad-Block on a case by case basis; if the site is one which I love, like Giant Bomb, I'll pay for the ability to remove ads and support it. Even if I love a site though I'm not going to turn Ad-Blocker off if they have awful advertisement polices (Pop-ups, audio advertisements and the like), that's something they need to correct and not the visitors responsibility.

This. There are sites out there that are specifically designed to fuck shit up for you. You can usually subscribe to and support trustworthy sites or sites you actually frequent, but for just browsing the web? There is absolutely no shame in using adblock.

I was making websites back when we had banner exchanges and spinning gifs. Since then, advertisements evolved into an absolute mess in some case. Some sites today still use unacceptable practices and techniques surrounding that stuff, and the best way to show your distaste for it is to actively do something about it, like NOT turn of adblock and give them more money. Even if all you do is visit the site and hit the back button because you know that site is going to be a terrible experience, it can still count as "ads served". Heck, even back then, users didn't want ads thrown in their face and found clever ways to block all images that were certain sizes and such.

I'm just waiting for suits to find a way to illegalize plugins like adblock though, on the grounds of "you're stealing content!".

I think it's just good practice to a) make the ads non-intrusive, b) make ads relevant c) let the user choose themselves if they want to see them or not and d) make sure the design of the website doesn't break if the user is using an ad remover. That's my philosophy behind it at least.

#35 Edited by Ares42 (2771 posts) -

I know from experience that my internet usage just drops like a stone if I don't use ad-block. The problem is that most of my time on internet is just disposable entertainment and at the slightest hint of resistance I just go "fuck it". Internet is basically like a big trash pile I rummage through and sometimes find something "interesting", and with ad-block I don't have to deal with the stench. Is it unfair of me? sure. But let's face it 99,99% of everything on the internet is crap content and is only viable business because of peoples ignorance and worldwide reach. Internet might be great for it's ability to connect people all over the world, but the business side is just a collection of all the crap that would not be able to survive in any traditional market.

#36 Edited by TaliciaDragonsong (8699 posts) -

The main reason I use one is because advertisements have become insanely annoying, big, flashy and what not. 
 
When they stop bugging me, or at least become a little more tolerable, I will consider to stop using adblocker.
 
I mean, I watched the VGA's and they cut to commercials like 10 times which is already a lot outside of my country's standards but it were the same goddamn advertisements every time. Same order every time. That just kills any enthusiasm I ever had for the product (like Jack Reacher, I will never go see that because of the commercial spam) and I will do my best to keep everyone from seeing it.

#37 Posted by UlquioKani (1157 posts) -

Reading this thread has made me go and unblock a bunch of sites from AdBlock because I can't take the guilt

#38 Posted by Oldirtybearon (4866 posts) -

So I take it that the people going "wah ad-block is the goddamn devil wah" have never tried killing time on YouTube without ad-block?

Seriously guys. 15-30 second ads before every video?

Fuck that. If advertisers wants to be obnoxious then I don't have to put up with their shit. Simple as.

#39 Posted by alternate (2719 posts) -

I guess you missed Brad on twitter a couple of days back going off on someone for using ad blockers and calling ti "morally indefensible" or some such.

#40 Posted by Petiew (1354 posts) -

I use Adblock, but turn it off on certain sites or streams that I use frequently and want to give a little extra revenue to.
Adblock is on for Giantbomb, the ads can often get bad and there was (Possibly still is) a bug were videos were unwatchable without it.
 
@alternate said:

I guess you missed Brad on twitter a couple of days back going off on someone for using ad blockers and calling ti "morally indefensible" or some such.

I hope this was taken entirely out of context. Anyone got a link?
#41 Posted by zels (207 posts) -

@Petiew said:

I use Adblock, but turn it off on certain sites or streams that I use frequently and want to give a little extra revenue to.
Adblock is on for Giantbomb, the ads can often get bad and there was (Possibly still is) a bug were videos were unwatchable without it.

@alternate said:

I guess you missed Brad on twitter a couple of days back going off on someone for using ad blockers and calling ti "morally indefensible" or some such.

I hope this was taken entirely out of context. Anyone got a link?

https://twitter.com/bradshoemaker/status/285463904266641409

#42 Posted by joshwent (2323 posts) -

https://twitter.com/bradshoemaker/status/285463904266641409

Yikes! I absolutely understand the necessity of ads in terms of how the internet currently functions ('free' content supported by mandatory-to-view ad space), but simply supporting it blindly has led to this weird website stagnation.

We're no longer in the horrible world of giant banners, entire pop up pages, and flash 'game' ads everywhere, but accepting even this more unobtrusive situation has turned some beautifully designed experiences into sites just seeming desperate to make an ugly buck.

Still kudos to sites like Giant Bomb to allow us a way out by paying directly for the content that we deeply love. Although I have to guess that ad revenue (at least from folks like me who watch and read everything that's posted here) may give them more papes then the wonderfully reasonable membership cost.

Also, this conversation here is especially interesting considering that Shelby Bonnie (co founder of C-net and main financier of Whiskey Media) was determined to completely do away with the CPM.

http://techcrunch.com/2009/09/25/lets-kill-the-cpm/

#43 Posted by crusader8463 (14426 posts) -

I use them because most sites make using them a nightmare without them. The PC's at work in the break room don't have them and when I mess around with them it's revolting to see how bad many sites are out there. Nothing I hate more then trying to watch a video and getting prerolls or having annoying ads pop up in the middle of videos.

#44 Edited by Azteck (7449 posts) -

I run Adblock Plus at all times. It's the first addon I install whenever I do a fresh install. Especially on Giant Bomb, I don't care about allowing ads.

Edit: Also those tweets by Brad are fucking dumb, and he should know better.

#45 Posted by SomeJerk (3361 posts) -

Adblock is a good companion to things like NoScript and a decent anti-virus program,  but if you don't deactivate it for safe sites or whitelist, fuck you.

#46 Edited by EXTomar (4916 posts) -

Going all the way Bernard-Lee, the point of HTML is that only describes what to render but leaves it up to web browser to handle it. You (nor the browser) are under any obligation rendner or display any HTML sent to your machine so combing through it to remove stuff you don't want to see like ads doesn't make you any more a bad person than someone who doesn't want to images from a block of addresses because they have a reputation for hosting NSFW images.

#47 Edited by Abendlaender (2866 posts) -

As long as there are ads that are f***** auto-start videos with sound that just starts blasting into my ears, I will use AdBlocker every single day.

I also change the channel during commercial breaks. I'm history's greatest monster

#48 Edited by Laiv162560asse (487 posts) -

@zels said:

@Petiew said:

I use Adblock, but turn it off on certain sites or streams that I use frequently and want to give a little extra revenue to.
Adblock is on for Giantbomb, the ads can often get bad and there was (Possibly still is) a bug were videos were unwatchable without it.

@alternate said:

I guess you missed Brad on twitter a couple of days back going off on someone for using ad blockers and calling ti "morally indefensible" or some such.

I hope this was taken entirely out of context. Anyone got a link?

https://twitter.com/bradshoemaker/status/285463904266641409

The attitude of and Ben Kuchera in this discussion seem to be that bypassing adverts is a form of stealing, it's 'ethically indefensible', 'entitled' and so forth. I find their perspective to be borderline batshit crazy. Ads are a way of generating revenue from the browsing behaviour of visitors. They are not some kind of unspoken ethical contract which requires the user to maintain that same behaviour no matter what, just out of sympathy for the content provider. If a user decides that ads devalue their experience such that they change their behaviour (eg. by blocking ads), then it is up to the content provider to find another way of monetising their behaviour - or maybe even come to terms with the fact that not everything in the universe can be monetised. The idea that on an ethical level you deserve money from every user who consumes your content - even though that content is freely published and even though (shock horror) not every user may consider your content to be worth anything - is about as entitled as it gets.

I've been a subscriber in the past but it has never been my responsibility to try and ensure the financial wellbeing of GB in exchange for their content. I've consumed free content freely and I've paid for added value features, based on my own values and financial situation. Anything beyond that is just guff; saying 'think about what would happen if we weren't able to make any money' isn't a business-customer relationship, it isn't ethics, it's just charity.

Sites with a good grasp of what their customer relationship should be tend to ask courteously if the user would consider turning off their adblockers, so users (like me) respond. If GB's official stance mirrors that of Brad's, in saying that we should just go elsewhere instead of turning off ads, I guess I could always do that instead.

#49 Posted by Ares42 (2771 posts) -

@zels said:

@Petiew said:

I use Adblock, but turn it off on certain sites or streams that I use frequently and want to give a little extra revenue to.
Adblock is on for Giantbomb, the ads can often get bad and there was (Possibly still is) a bug were videos were unwatchable without it.

@alternate said:

I guess you missed Brad on twitter a couple of days back going off on someone for using ad blockers and calling ti "morally indefensible" or some such.

I hope this was taken entirely out of context. Anyone got a link?

https://twitter.com/bradshoemaker/status/285463904266641409

I guess that makes my dad (who without hesitation always changes channel when ads are shown on TV) ethically bankrupt. I mean, there's an entire business devoted to letting you skip ads on TV, where's the outrage about that ?

#50 Posted by joshwent (2323 posts) -

@Ares42 said:

I guess that makes my dad (who without hesitation always changes channel when ads are shown on TV) ethically bankrupt. I mean, there's an entire business devoted to letting you skip ads on TV, where's the outrage about that ?

Different situation. The money from advertisers on TV is paid upfront to air their stuff. Modern website ads generate money based on how many times they're viewed. Skipping commercials has zero effect on a station getting paid, other than advertisers becoming more weary if they know for a fact that the ads they're paying for won't be seen. Disabling ads on a site stops those payments entirely.

So your Dad is ethically bankrupt, just not because of this.