wait a second, you can legally force me to watch your ads?
if you’ve been following all the hoopla over ad-block plus, the firefox plugin that let’s you strip advertising from websites and improve your online experience by letting you view content without any distractions (and loading sites faster), you already know of the impending battle between consumers and ad-supported content producers/publishers.
while consumers argue that ads are irrelevant and slow down access to the content, the anti-ad-block camp argues that they rely on advertising as their main source of revenue and the plugin is killing their business model. the latter argument makes sense at first, but when you think about the users who are actually installing the extension, the argument doesn’t hold anymore. these users are already largely banner-blind (i.e. they are practically blind to advertisements on sites) and are extremely unlikely to ever click on an ad. by installing the extension to their browsers, they are only improving their experience without causing any additional loss to the content creators/publishers.
regardless of which side of the argument is more legitimate, pretty soon we might see lawsuits flying.
many web sites prohibit any kind of ad-blocking in their terms of service agreements. myspace.com prohibits ‘covering or obscuring the banner advertisements on your personal profile page, or any MySpace.com page via hmtl/css or any other means.’ six apart’s livejournal uses similar language, as do some news organizations including the chicago sun-times and fox tv’s houston affiliate.
what we’re seeing here is reflective of nothing more than the fact that the advertisements are so poor in their targeting and relevancy that the users just don’t want to see them and won’t click on them even if they do see them. at the same time, rather than acknowledging the flaw and improving the ads, the content producers/publishers want to push the ads in the consumers’ faces. with reference to the question of whether something can be done about firefox and ad-block plus, the honest truth is that all that is going to come from discussions of the plugin is increased exposure and greater user adoption to the point where advertisers are forced to innovate towards more viable ads.
Technorati Tags: online, advertising, adblock plus, firefox
September 15th, 2007 at 6:11 am
I have no problem with people coming to my site and blocking the ads. It is far preferable than having them come to my site and clicking my ads like mad to get me banned from those ad programs!
The key is to make your advertising part of your content.
What’s that, your site sells cars? If you sell advertising to other sites that sell cars or help people buy cars readers will be less likely to block your advertising.
Another way is to host all the ads on your own site. Got some banners? Save the files in the same directory as the rest of your images. If you block those ads you will also be blocking all of the sites graphics and that will not be an enjoyable experience.
September 15th, 2007 at 6:33 am
Well, although I agree that some sites show irrelevant ads - I can also say that there are millions of sites that show really highly targeted ads.
I turn down more advertisers than I sell ad space to. I put my visitors experience BEFORE I put advertising revenue.
But lets be honest here - without those ads, everyone risks not getting the content I put out there - without a revenue model, my business sinks.
I feel very angry when someone thinks that just because I own a business, somehow I become less human. I care about my business, feeding my family, AND my visitors just as much as they care about fast page loads.
Arguably, I care more.
September 15th, 2007 at 10:15 am
I agree with your first point that the people installing the plugin aren’t looking at ads to begin with. So it’s a wash with respect to them.
But let’s assume that a considerable number of readers are using the plugin: 10% of a given readership use the ad-block software and you get 100,000 page views per month. For websites that are monetized and selling ad space based on their visitor stats, advertisers are being mislead. For this website getting 100k views per month, the actual views after ad-block is 90k. And that should be reflected in the stats. So if people are going to use the ad-block program, somehow, stats need to reflect that.
Why? Well, depending on the advertiser, especially a banner advertiser, they’re trying to get the opportunity for views (and low clicks with lots of potentially high quality views is good enough). Advertisers bank on their creativity to create a view into a click, and a click into some response. So, advertisers need to know the actual number of people that will see the ad when they purchase it.
September 20th, 2007 at 2:06 am
[...] being robbed blind by people who block ads and on the other side we have web users who say that the ads are garbage and they slow down page load times. Where do I stand on this issue? I stand to the [...]
October 9th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
Let’s remember three things here.
1) If your ads were not terrible (not just poorly targeted, I also mean unsightly, annoying and obtrusive), there would have been no adblock to begin with.
2) If you start blocking FF, remember that whatever you offer is NOT unique. Best case scenario, those you block will simply go elsewhere. Worst case, they’ll tell people they know to avoid your site.
3) No matter what you do, there are a lot of old-timers (like myself) from when there were no ads on the net. There are also many who are gung-ho against ads. You will not be able to beat them all. Lynx still lives, you know.
I am sick of everyone saying how this is stealing. It’s the same damn thing as changing the station when a commercial comes on, turning the radio off in the car, just plain not looking at billboards, throwing away junk mail and tossing the ads from your local paper.
Get off your high horse.