Linked by David Adams on Fri 19th Mar 2010 21:07 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes Online advertising has been a hot topic for the past week or so, with Ars Technica trying out an interesting, somewhat desperate experiment wherein they blocked access to their content for people using Adblock. Of course, if this were to become some kind of movement among publishers, it would probably just spark a technological cat-and-mouse game that would surely be reminiscent of DRM cracking or iPhone jailbreaking. But in their post-mortem, Ars states that it was a worthwhile awareness campaign, and I hope that's true. But I thought it would be a good idea to try to bring the collective OSNews brainpower together and crowdsource the idea of how to raise money for a web site in an age where advertising is increasingly un-viable.
Thread beginning with comment 414441
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Random replies
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 20th Mar 2010 10:47 UTC in reply to "RE: Random replies"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

Because ad agencies join the dots.


What do you mean? I don't get this saying. All I know is that it's apparantly okay to trust random Google links and the random stuff we (and any other site) links to - but not ad agencies, which are, in fact, chosen by us too - just like the sites we link to. It's inconsistent.

And let's not get into Flash cookies.


Flash has nothing to do with ads. I block Flash too because Flash in and of itself is an inherent danger and a CPU hog. There's nothing inherently wrong with JS, just that it might possibly be used to attack your computer.

At which point I ask you the same question: what makes you trust Google, Wikipedia (random links inserted by total strangers!), OSNews, and every other site and the JS they link to - but not the ads we run? It is highly inconsistent.

Again - you have every right to, but I still believe it to be a reason of convenience.

Edited 2010-03-20 10:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Random replies
by Kroc on Sat 20th Mar 2010 11:36 in reply to "RE[2]: Random replies"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

http://www.imasuper.com/66/technology/flash-cookies-the-silent-priv...

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/08/you-deleted-your-cookies-thi...

The problem, is that with ad impressions across multiple sites, they can follow you ever so closely. In the real world, it would be akin to allowing advertisers to use CCTV to check the where and when everybody goes so that they could be targeted with ads.

You're free of course to not be bothered by that, most people are not bothered about what advertisers do, or what information they give out. I just choose to utilise the ability I have to render and interpret the content that gets delivered to my computer how I please, _for a pleasant viewing experience_.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Random replies
by AdamW on Tue 23rd Mar 2010 15:46 in reply to "RE[2]: Random replies"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

Thom, why are you assuming everyone trusts random Google links? I certainly don't.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Random replies
by AdamW on Tue 23rd Mar 2010 15:52 in reply to "RE[2]: Random replies"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

oh, and you also seem unaware that noscript's default configuration blocks *all* javascript. Including js from the host of the site. Not just third-party js. If you want to see the js from the host, you have to whitelist it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Random replies
by oiaohm on Tue 23rd Mar 2010 23:13 in reply to "RE[3]: Random replies"
oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30

oh, and you also seem unaware that noscript's default configuration blocks *all* javascript. Including js from the host of the site. Not just third-party js. If you want to see the js from the host, you have to whitelist it.


I am not unaware. This is a trust thing. You have a chance that a user running noscript will unblock your own sites scripting. Third parties forget it.

Next thing is what forms payment for advertisement requires javascript. The form is impression based advertisement (pay per view) does to see how many people really did display the ads.

Click through and pay percent of perchance only needs a referral item added to the end of url or the site it pointing to being yours.

Adblock does not take out ever pure <a href="site">name I don't know of any adblocking system that does. These also will go straight past noscript. Even better with href=site you can send the link to your site and have it bounce onto end in the process counting how many click troughs happen.

Currently lets say the advertisement company decided to cut the number of click throughs they paid you by lets say 10 percent. Would you be able to prove it and would you know. Referral systems can be more trusted reason you can place your own counter on it.

Pay per view is also only 100 percent trust-able to the site is doing it themselves. How come you can make the site require java-script to function right and user is more likely to trust you since you are providing them with the content. Not some third party they have not had the time to fully check out. Just to read a story they don't have time.

What if the issue is not just ad-blocking but the advertisement firms stealing as well. See this issue here is trust. Basically why should I keep a site running systems I know that could be used to steal from them. Quality of there methods need to improve.

Currently lot of sites are depending on just one type of impression based advertisement without out means to audit. Recommend for the lazy. Blocked by many in current market its how to lose your shirt. 2 years ago it started drying up. Sites have failed to respond to change.

Its like lets go to war and only send 1 type of forces in and bugger the other side has weapons that pick them off simply. Then complain to everyone that you lost the war because the other side had a unfair advantage. Sorry you would think a commander saying that was a idiot.

Business is war. Truly business is war. Same tactics used in war are used in business. Most important of all don't depend on a single solution. Always have multiable solutions so if Plan A fails Plan B still works. Links at end of articles to directly related bits that are for sale work be useful.

With the patent trouble starting to appear setting up a referral agreement with a company that sells full copies of patents would be a wise idea.

This is what you have to think about. With the articles I am running what people looking at it could be interested in or need to follow up with and will any of those parties pay me.

Really when you have a stack of referral pay systems setup some cases you can give them to the authors who want payment. Ie they get paid percentage what their story generates. So it will pay them to pick out valid and matching items to reference at end of article. And just like all editors jobs checking that your writers have not over stepped has to happen.

I call it lazy the day of handing you advertisement over to a third party and forget about it is basically over. Little more effort and less people will slip through cracks.

Reply Parent Score: 1