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 414579
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
AdBlock does exactly what it says.
by oiaohm on Sun 21st Mar 2010 23:08 UTC
oiaohm
Member since:
2009-05-30

"AdBlock and similar will avoid downloading the ads and thus not showing them, right? "

It block the downloads of the ads and they are never downloaded. It also rewrite the page removing evidence of what it blocked. Exactly like http://ossi.cjb.net/sw/junkex.html from 2001 and this is based on a older project that started back in the 1990~.

http://www.privoxy.org/ Is also a currently supported proxy that does the same thing.

Now if you are talking about downloading and not showing. I can do that too. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/748 Greasemonkey. Yet I am unlikely to. Overhead show page renders just to hide the ads is not worth it.

Think about it an auto updating Greasemonkey system countering your sites advertisement system you will lose means to win. But the user of a system like that is losing as well in performance. Now problem is some of the current advertisers will cause this to happen because they advertise inappropriate material.

Remember running adblock is not costless it does have a performance price. Noscript is almost costless on performance. Both cases the advertising systems sites are using are costing more than there counter measures.

People wanting to block ads are already better armed to take the ads out then any system to counter. Basically fight is not an option the ads display war is lost it was lost about 4 years ago. All you will cause by Ars style fight is that the techs get to the point no ads forms will work.

Only solution is answer why people are blocking. Most are not trying to harm your site. The point you have to see is it not your actions alone that cause them to install adblocking software either.

Users have to be treated better. Sites have to think about things. Like donation/links buttons what is wrong with asking for money. What is wrong with a few direct links to likes of amazon where it will directly kick back. That right lots of advertising firms forbid this in the agreement. Move to better firms.

How ads have done is causing the fight back. Until that is addressed sites don't stand a chance.

Big thing to remember your content is being displayed on the visitors own machine using the vistors own internet connection.

With a newspaper you print it so you can force ads but even adblocking exists there. Classic example is people cutting bits out of newspapers. They could have taken the full page with ads but no they cut it out because they only want to see what they are interested in.

Now the most effective newspaper ads are the ones that are useful and people are prepared to cut out and use later. Notice something here. A referral link to amazon or the like that user can bookmark ie cut out is higher profit and follows what has been learnt over all the time of newspaper advertising.

Ads if they are their must be light and 100 percent either useful or on topic and must be able to be bookmarked in away that the bookmark gives you kickbacks.

Seriously you wonder why the ads are not working for a lot of sites their design is screwed up by using advertisers that are not passing the basics. The issues have not changed in over 100 years.

Notice the content separation also in the paper based print sex pictures are not mixed up with general content like cars. Yet some advertises online do mix it up. If this happened the mag was pulled from shelf.

Really a lot of people don't like this. But if sites had to have classification and advertising firms were forced by law to obey these classifications you would have less cases of ads blocking.

Now since this cannot be done. Naming and Shaming the bad advertiser operators to push them out the market is something that needs to happen. Does anyone know of a single site that reviews online advertisement firms for providing correct content. Naming and Shaming is not the publics job. Its the medias themselves. Ie little bit of self regulation is required as well.

Reply Score: 1

oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30

inappropriate material bit I missed a little. Look at the looking for sex section in newspaper its text.

inappropriate material for young people done in text is less offensive than images of inappropriate material. Reason text based people have to be able to create image in mind.

Image blocking should be expected as long as rouges remain in the advertising game. No matter how much you hate ads done it text like google single line ads they are the least likely to offend and the least likely for anyone to block.

Blocking is not happening without motive. Reduce motive more income.

Reply Parent Score: 1