Ad Blockers, Ads, And You

[Sanic Screwdriver 345]

I had it for like 30 minutes but then I thought things like youtubers makes their money from ads sometimes and so do websites. So I'm basically not giving them money they earned if I have it on and am watching their vids or something.

[Yourmomsponies 444]

I only use ad-blocker for certain ads. never just block ads on an entire website.

because I know they get money from the ads.

If its a site I reallly supprt i make sure that ghostery and ad block are turned off.

[Retro*Derpy 3,183]

I see ad-block as both a savior, and a killing machine. It helps those that have trouble with pop up ads and getting virus from them, but it also destroys the internet economy(more than it already is). Some websites, and yes I'm going to say youtube, cause people like me to get ad-block. Though this isn't entirely the user's fault. Once Google gets smart enough to realize that if they don't play ads during the video, they might start getting income from ads. The only other reason I will use ad-block is on suspicious looking websites. Though honestly, I think that the ISPs should give some of their profits to websites based on their visits, though I'm not sure if they do this already, I don't own a public website. If they don't, than if people did stay with ad-block, they would still get a income in.

Edited February 10, 2013 by Retro✮Derpy

[Darth Fader 24]

I used to use an AdBlock plugin for Firefox, but one day I had an epiphany and a moral change and decided, after a browser reset anyway, not to reinstall it.  I know if I was a webmaster that spent a good amount of money on the site upkeep and the product, that I would be peeved, unless I was making money from another source.

[Harmonic Revelations 8,835]

I use an Adblocker (Adblock Plus) but I do add exceptions, for example, I allow ads on this website. Mainly because I trust and want to support websites, but I use it generally for Youtube.

[Treble Bolt 1,122]

I am replying in lieu on the question looking at the other side of the spectrum (the people using ads for revenue).

 

I honestly don't care about ads....at all. There has yet to be an ad that makes me curious about what it advertising, desiring of new product I do not have, not care about the hottest new media out there. I have always been a frugal person, and to me, my time is valuable (as is everyone's). I do not want to waste my time viewing products/services I know I will never use, need, or desire. The ads therefore have no leverage upon my life, thus why would I want to waste my time looking at something I don't care about at all?

 

I am not sucked into the media mainstream, since media/products is used to generate revenue for companies creating the said media/products have (for the most part) enough revenue on top of the ads they are making. I can understand the cycle that is there in order to sell their products/media, but there should be an option for those not interested in anything they have to offer.  Just as we can say no to telemarketers and other salesmen, we should be able to say no to ads as well. 

 

As for the little guys making money for their websites off ads to keep them going. There are other ways, even if that does mean what they are offering is free. In fact, media should not be free, whether it be webcomics, small store sites, informative websites (like EQD) and anything else that is out there on the web. Just as you pay to watch a TV show (if it's available on the media platform you commonly use {i.e. i don't have tv, and my husband's parents don't have a choice in getting the HUB}), you pay for that piece of media itself (like getting episodes through Itunes). It should be the same with online media/products. Why have a middleman allowing you to make revenue without getting the full profit anyways because that middleman gets his share. I am not very keen on internet politics, but I believe that if there is goods/service available that is a LUXERY (i.e. not necessary for basic living), we should pay for it as directly as we do if we walk into a store to buy an apple. What becomes of the money we spend is a different issue, but we shouldn't have to wait for someone in the store to talk to us, advertising a can a tuna before when we may be allergic to tuna and the clerk is just getting in the way of me getting an apple. We don't have that issue in our daily activities, so why should the product marketing model be different for the internet. 

This is part of the reason I'm a subscriber, I feel like I should be paying for the service that this forum provides in generating a user friendly environment, good moderation, and a place to belong even though I do not know any bronies IRL. This forum is not necessary for my enjoyment of the show at all, nor is it essential for my daily living.  It's an added bonus to my livelihood that I choose to partake in and be a part of and thus I should pay for it and get right to the point of what I desire; not be told about something completely unrelated and uninteresting for me just so I can get a "free" service. 

Besides,

THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH!

we're going to pay for things in some way, shape or form. So why not make it as simplistic and practical as possible?

[Simon 4,557]

I have ad block plus for a couple of reasons.  The biggest one is that a lot of sites have harmful and overly obtrusive advertisements... the other day I went on a site that I had previously white listed, and got a pop-up ad that wouldn't close, and I ended up having to do a force-close on the internet and lost a ton of stuff thanks to it.  Because of stuff like that happening to me, I'm very selective about what sites I white-list.  The problem with internet advertisements compared to something like television advertisements is that they are basically unregulated and can have really harmful effects on your computer.  Honestly, it's a huge security risk to not use ad-block, because if you don't have it installed you have no way of knowing if an unfamiliar site you're going on is going to have advertisements that are harmful.

 

I also love ad block because I can block non-advertisement things that I just don't want.  I don't do that very often, but some websites I go on often have so much useless stuff cluttering up the page that it's nice to be able to disable some things permanently without much effort.

 

As far as this site goes, I do have ads enabled and the site white-listed.  I think it's a shame that because of a minority of site owners ad block is necessary because it does harm site owners who are just genuinely trying to get back their expenses from running a website.  However I do think it's necessary to have enabled and I wouldn't use the internet without it anymore than I'd use the internet without virus software installed. 

[Sekhayet 253]

I use an ad-blocker because:

 

I save on RAM.

I save on CPU.

I save on Bandwidth.

 

I don't ever ever EVER click on ads because of the ease of infection they pose to computers.

I don't ever ever EVER click on ads because I'll not buy any of it anyway.

 

When all of those concerns become negligible, then I'll look at ads. until then, I'm going to sanitize away.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Sekhayet

[Courageous Thunder Dash 7,824]

I use ad blocker to keep Chrome running quickly. Plus, on some sites, some ads contain malicious content hidden in them. 

[CheeryFox 23,821]

I implore everyone NOT to use ad blockers on this site. Ads do pay the bills and if you follow the honor system, Internet sites will stay healthy. If ads are acting up, please contact 'Support' when you are able to.

 

:grin2:

[Haruhi-chan 486]

I use an ad-blocker because of my ADHD. Ads are very distracting to me, and I find them very annoying and what not. They are nothing but an eyesore. They are also very hard for me to ignore, hence why they trigger my ADHD.

[SparklingSquirrels 21,341]

I always use adblock, even on this site. I'm sorry, but I hate ads.

[DubWolf 17,263]

Ads are usually relevant for me. I don't use an adblocker since they're usually to the side and I don't mind them there while I browse. My only problem is with POP UPS!! Those dam ads deserve to be clicked away immediately . It's too bad they aren't illegal .

Edited February 6, 2015 by SparkWolf

[Guest90210 3,568]

I have AdBlock installed, but, I disable it on sites that don't have intrusive ads. If your ad is preventing me from viewing my content (such as ads before videos, ads that are obnoxiously large, etc), then I'm using AdBlock. If your ad isn't directly in my way, then I'm fine with it. An example of this is these very forums. There's small banner ads across the top and bottom of each page (and other ones which I never even notice) which don't bother me and don't dampen my user experience at all, so I have AdBlock disabled and ads turned on to support the site.

 

The worst offender is ads with sound that automatically plays when you enter the page, forcing the user to scramble to find the mute button. That's the fastest way to drive me away from a site.

[Magpie 623]

I have it on one of my browsers, but reserve it for whenever a site's ads are actively harmful. Any sort of pop-up filled with malware downloads, for example. Even then, I don't think I've ever actually used it because I simply can't be bothered to turn it on and add new sites when I could just ignore the ad.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Brosparkles

[AFK 89]

I usually use an ablocker.

The reason is I don't like how ads clutter up webpages or appear unskippable in videos.

 

I usually white list the content I regularly visit.

 

I know it's not nice, I admit it and don't try to rationalize it.

[KatonRyu 1,033]

I use adblockers because too many sites have taken to playing audio ads these days. There are sites that I like enough to disable my blockers (this site is one of them), but for most I leave it on.

 

My biggest reason to install an adblocker, though, was Youtube. I despise the ads they play and I refuse to believe that a company like Google is hurt by my blocking of their ads.

 

On sites that I have whitelisted in my adblocker I still block trackers, however. I don't mind ads being there as long as they're not in my face the whole time, but I don't need them tracking every click on the site, especially since I've never intentionally clicked on an ad and never will.

[Admiral Regulus 2,769]

I started using Ad Block Plus back in 2011. A few months later, I realized what I was doing to site owners, and I disabled the extension. After less than a day of web browsing with Ad Block disabled, I was so infuriated that I had to enable it again. It was like being sent to the hottest pit of hell—ads loaded before I could even figure out if I wanted to view a page. Some would redirect me to other pages. Some would try to trick me into thinking my computer was running a virus scan. Some would play shitty audio automatically.

 

I hated it. Absolutely hated it. I realized that my Ad Block had spoiled me, but it was too painful of an experience to stop using it.

 

Fast forward a little bit. About a year ago, I tried white-listing ads on websites that I frequently visit. A few sites claimed to use unobtrusive ads, so I was like... "well, okay. I'll allow it here, but only here." Again, I refreshed the page a few times and I couldn't help but notice how much more cluttered everything was. "What's this doing here?" I'd ask myself. "BUY NEW FURNITURE NOW! 700% OFF! EXCLUSIVE DEALZ!" they say. No, that's not what I'm here for!

 

So I went back into my browser settings, and again enabled my ad-blocker.

 

Yeah, I use ad-blocker on every site. Yeah, I understand what this does to web developers and content creators. I feel really guilty about it, too. It's not that I don't want to support the sites that I go to, it's just that I hate ads. So much. It doesn't matter if I enable them, because I'm never, ever going to click on one. I've never done that once in my life. Having ads enabled just puts shit on my screen that I'm going to ignore, so why not go ahead and use the ad-blocker to save myself the trouble?

 

I know. I'm a webmaster's nightmare. I'm fully aware of that. But... I'm the kind of guy who mutes the TV every time commercials come on, and the kind of guy who throws 90% of his mail in the trash without ever reading it. I don't answer my phone unless I'm expecting a call or I know who the person is. I don't read magazines simply because I hate seeing advertisements in them. It's not just internet ads... I do whatever I can to avoid seeing ads anywhere else in my life. I just don't like them.

 

If someone walks up to me and tries talking to me about their new company/website/product/whatever, I'm going to politely say "sorry, I'm not interested." This happened to me at school today, in fact. A few days ago, someone put a slip of paper in my car's window. Without even reading it, I picked it off and threw it in the trash. Again, I wasn't interested. I've considered putting up a "no soliciting" sign on my front door, because at least twice a week I open the door to find an advert pinched in the crack. No matter what the advert is for, it's getting thrown away.

 

To me, using adblock is really no different from any of these other behaviors. It's my way of saying, "sorry, I'm not interested." If you insist that I may be interested in whatever you're trying to sell me, you're just wasting your time. When you go around and advertise your product, you have to understand that not everyone is going to listen to you or read your advertisement. Not all solicitation is welcomed. I justify my use of adblock, as I view it as a virtual no soliciting sign. It is unfortunate that webmasters lose out from this, but I'm going to stand my ground here.

 

I don't want to view your ads. I'm perhaps one of the most frugal people on the planet, so even if I do view them, I'm not going to buy your product anyway.

 

In all honesty, I wish I could have an Ad Blocker in real life. It'd be really nice if junk mail was automatically repelled from my mailbox through a magnetic field or something.

 

Now, all that said, as soon as I graduate and get a job of my own with a steady income, I will gladly donate or subscribe to keep the sites I use from going under. Even now, with me being the poor student that I am, I've already donated to several websites. Though I use adblock, I don't think it's fair to be a freeloader, and I am willing to rectify that.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Admiral Regulus

[Pixel Stick 927]

Dear Advertising Companies,

 

It's well-known that the goal of advertising is to find a way to make a particular product or service stand out in the minds of your viewers.  We all get this.  But there has been a trend on many websites that I frequent to forcefully put ads in front of the content I'm there to read, by sliding it over the text, fading it in over my entire browser window, or even opening up separate windows over or under the one I'm using.  In some cases, these ads begin playing video and audio automatically, without my consent and without respecting my browser's settings, and in a few isolated cases, I've even had two or three ads playing content at the same time.

 

All of these things are incredibly frustrating and irritating, especially since they require that I install extra ad-blocking software to prevent them from disturbing my browsing experience.  It's gotten to the point where the first thing I do whenever an ad appears is to locate its "close" button and click it as soon as possible.  Often, this means I've closed the ad before it's even begun to display the product in question.  Obviously, this isn't really helping the people who wish to advertise with you.  In the meantime, the intrusiveness of these ads makes me much less likely to want to purchase the product being advertised - in fact, I tend to tell my friends and family to avoid those products specifically because they were advertised in an intrusive manner.

 

So I really want to just ask you one question: Are you completely blind to the impact your ads have on your potential customers?  By making your ads more intrusive, you're actively harming the companies whose products are on display by alienating the people you're trying to reach.  People like me form negative associations with those products and services because they are now inconvenienced and annoyed by the ads.  Instead of achieving its intended purpose - to make me remember Brand X when I think I need something - I now think "Brand X had a really annoying ad.  I'll look for something else."

 

This is especially true of ads that actually require you to interact with them before they can be dismissed.  As an example, there was an ad for Clorox Wipes that ran on YouTube a couple of years ago ahead of some videos.  Normally, ads like this would play for 15 seconds or offer a "Skip to Video" option after 5 seconds, but this ad instead required that I simulate a wiping motion in order to "see how effective the wipe is", and provided no way to bypass it.  As a direct result of this experience, I made a point to avoid the Clorox brand in my store when I needed to pick up some cleaning wipes, opting instead for a competing product.

 

I would like to encourage you to think about different, less intrusive ways to advertise products.  We, your potential customers, don't like being insulted, interrupted or annoyed by advertisements, and we don't enjoy having to perform extra clicks on websites to dismiss unwanted content.  Speaking for myself, I don't mind ads in specific banners on the margins of the content I went to visit, and I can tolerate ads at the beginning of videos.  One of the better schemes I've seen recently is in a mobile game I've been playing, which gives me a small incentive to voluntarily watch an ad in exchange for in-game currency.  These are all fine ways to advertise.  But overriding text and graphical content on a webpage (eg. on news sites) with full-screen content several seconds after I've begun reading that content is incredibly irritating, and as I mentioned, it makes me want to avoid the products being advertised.  I imagine the same is true of many other people as well.

 

Put simply, "back off".  If you want people to click on ads for more information, please do so in a way that encourages them to do so without getting in their faces.  You will, in fact, see your profits rise.

 

Thank you.

 

-- A concerned, and annoyed, Internet citizen.

[simba86 1,541]

I use the free browser extension adblocker plus so i almost never see adds at all, I got sick of them always getting shoved in my face at every turn, adblocker has blocked 375,000 adds in the last year for me, and my bandwith thanks it because i am not wasting data with my browser loading hundreds of thousands of pictures and playing video ads, I wish i had downloaded it sooner, 

[ThatOneComrade 1,091]

You know what'd be cool? If advertisers got Viners to do their ads for them. I'd be more than likely to spend a couple bucks on Doritos because they made an ad that 1) Didn't last forever and 2) Didn't waste my time.

[simba86 1,541]

commercials don't even really even fous on the product and its features anymore, they just strap it on a celebrity and expect you to buy it based on them wearing or using it, 

[WriterOnTheRun 25]

For me adds don't even work, except for when I already plan on buying the item.  But I do agree on the fact that your brain automatically associates the item in mind with the add that lasted for 5 minutes with super loud audio at 4 am.  I expecially hate it when you hit x and another pop up shows up.  Thankfully since then I've installed the add blocker so I only see the little ads at the bottom of the screen that are approved by google.

[simba86 1,541]

I think all the in your face ads have driven a ton of people to use adblocker just to be able to look at a site without having to x off all the adds

[Yummychickenblue 301]

I don't think any advertisers visit MLPForums.

 

Your story about the Clorox wipes made think about something: What if brands are making annoying ads for their competitors so that customers don't buy from the brand that annoying ad was advertising?