In Defense of Defense: Why Ad Blockers Are Essential (Op-Ed)

[canadianvice]

I can appreciate concern over ad blockers, but frankly, it's very straight forward. I don't like ads. I do not buy things in ads, I do not click ads, and many are majorly obtrusive.

Newgrounds worked to be incompatible with adblockers for a while - do you know what I did? I stopped using Newgrounds entirely. No views encouraging artists, no comments encouraging discussion and pageviews, no additional traffic encouraging SEO rankings.

Many users contribute in ways that are not tangible but make a difference. If I give one good answer on tomshardware to someone who likely may not know anything about adblockers (since we get a lot of traffic from across the spectrum) they'll come back. Hey, just got 2 page loads, rather than one.

I don't need these services, they largely need me. Or just market my data, but be transparent about it. I don't mind privacy violation so long as it's understood what's being violated before I go to the party.

 

[Blore]

"So even though I have ad-blocking software installed, I make it a point to whitelist news and reviews sites I couldn't live without."

That's very nice of you. You're a member of the (less than) 1% of AdBlock users who make use of the whitelist feature. And that's the problem.

AdBlock has now passed the critical threshold of non-professional internet users. Now it's being installed en masse by mom and pop users. And *now* we're going to see the publishing industry -- including your site -- decimated in terms of revenues.

All of the arguments you can make in favor of adblocking, pretend that there will still be sites to read even if everyone blocks ads. Of course, this will not be the case. The web really isn't an infinite resource. It only seems like one because we have a system in place which feeds that resource. Take it away, and you'll be left with cat pictures and dating sites.

 

[McHenryB]

Here's an alternative take on the moral question.

I can categorically state that I will never follow up on any advertisement presented to me on a news web site. That being the case, I have a moral duty to block those advertisements. Otherwise, the advertisers are being cheated in being charged for advertisements that will have no possible effect.

Really, the original article that started these discussions is encouraging us to help the web sites cheat advertisers by charging them for advertisements that will have no effect. By blocking ads I am helping the advertisers to concentrate their advertisement only where they may have some effect. This reduces advertising costs and consequently decreases the cost of products.

I feel it is immoral of websites to try and defraud advertisers - and hence take the food out of their children's mouths - by charging for advertisements that will be ineffective. Perhaps they should only be allowed to charge for click-throughs rather than just page views?

 

[littleleo]

I guess we see how far Tom's has changed from when it 1st started, to now where it is a marketing Juggernaut with pop up adds on every inch of every page of their articles. I guess I understand why they felt the need to pen such an article. Excuse me while I just SMH in disappointment.

 

[jpishgar]

All of the arguments you can make in favor of adblocking, pretend that there will still be sites to read even if everyone blocks ads. Of course, this will not be the case. The web really isn't an infinite resource. It only seems like one because we have a system in place which feeds that resource. Take it away, and you'll be left with cat pictures and dating sites.

Innovation is a remarkable thing. I remember back when MMOs were gigantic undertakings, and the idea of playing an MMO for free was unfathomable. Designers said no way, no gamer would tolerate seeing ads or paying for premium things. Now, the market is flooded with them. Granted, most are awful, but even the biggest grandpappy of them all, World of Warcraft, has gone free-to-play in a sense.

Note, I'm not arguing for complete adoption of ad-blocking software across the board for everyone. I'm also not advocating for aggressive whitelisting. I'm saying, there is a sensible middle ground, and the lion's share of the responsibility to not poison the well is on the ad industry and networks, only secondarily the user for how they browse.

Really, the original article that started these discussions is encouraging us to help the web sites cheat advertisers by charging them for advertisements that will have no effect.

You'd be surprised what kinds of effects advertising has on you. You don't have to click an ad for it to work. Product name recognition is almost as important as brand loyalty. Just outright knowing the very name of a power supply or a peripheral increases your probability of purchasing it over one you've previously heard or seen nothing about. The mind gravitates towards the familiar, and impressions can be just as important as clicks.

-JP

 

[marraco]

If you want to be whitelisted, there are some things that you need to do:

-Give guarantee that you will not eat my PC resources with rogue flash garbage or whatever. I don't like my browsing experience to be ruined by bad code which stops my computer.

-Give guarantee that you will not profit from scam ads. Your site will not have a "download" button which drives to a scam/addware/crapware/cheatware website.

- Be responsive if some used complain about some ad. Don't be in denial.

-Give guarantees that your webpage will load fast, and will be agile to browse.

-Give guarantee of privacy. I don't want to be spied by facebook, google, tweeter, and all that crap. I don't want to log here or on another website, and simultaneously be logged on who knows how many websites around the Internet. That's not acceptable.

I don't want to enter here, and find that "I'm logged" here. No way. No deal.

 

[McHenryB]

You'd be surprised what kinds of effects advertising has on you. You don't have to click an ad for it to work. Product name recognition is almost as important as brand loyalty. Just outright knowing the very name of a power supply or a peripheral increases your probability of purchasing it over one you've previously heard or seen nothing about. The mind gravitates towards the familiar, and impressions can be just as important as clicks.

I'm not sure I agree with that, but let's just follow through the implications of it being the case. You seem, in essence, to be saying that I am more likely to buy a particular brand of PSU (for example) just because an advertisement has appeared for it on your web site. in other words, Tom's Hardware is influencing my buying decisions not for technical reasons but because a manufacturer has paid them to do so.

Now I always thought that the ethos of Tom's, the whole point of the site, was to help people make informed purchasing decisions based on the merits of the product. You seem to be saying that you are aware that in fact the site also influences us according to payments received by Tom's from manufacturers and retailers. I think this is a very good argument for banning advertisements altogether, at least those that have any connection whatsoever with the sort of topics that Tom's deals with. I do not wish to think that by visiting Tom's I am being influenced, however subtly, towards a particular product for reasons other than technical excellence, performance, value for money, etc. I certainly don't want to feel that Tom's is influncing me because a manufacturer has paid them to do so.

I think this reinforces my position that I owe it to myself to block advertisements on your web site, to avoid this sort of influence. Furhermore, surely I owe it to Tom's to do so to, to help preserve the site's independence and integrity. Before I was blocking ads just for my own convenience; now I realize that it is my absolute moral duty to do so. Whitelisting would not make the position any more acceptable.

My conscience is clear!

 

[nukemaster]

Very good writeup.

The advertisements here have become much less of an issue than some in the past. I remember some covering the full screen.

A more recent one was this(covering part of the article), but least digikey is useful to me since I make orders from them from time to time.

 

[krayy]

SPINNNINGGG. You're stealing free content. You will ruin it for everyone else by installing ad blockers. Ad blockers are not a form of protection from malware. That's the lamest excuse ever.

"That's half because I'm comfortable with accepting a small amount of ad distraction in exchange for good content" = Because I feel guilty about stealing.

 

[dvanburen]

First get rid of the random highlighted words that pop up into video ads. Then we'll talk about disabling adblock.

 

[husker]

If I created a business that is predicated on the honor system, then market forces will determine if that is a good business model or not. I should not expect natural human behavior to be altered, or for society to redesign itself around my business.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

My solution that seems to work well for me and the websites I visit.

Turn off flash, this stops all of the annoying pop up video ads and you just get the simple static picture ad. Saves on bandwidth and anoyances of screaming video adds.

that wont work for long. Googles Doubleclick just started advising against Flash ads in favor of all HTML5.

+1. Agreed, heh, Flash. What is this 2012?

 

[mpdugas]

Tom's is a funny website: I block ALL adware, and Tom's keeps redirecting me to some lame "Captcha" screen, claiming my PC is doing something suspicious.

Yeah, something suspicious, like blocking ads.

Nasty folks, these. Is this Avram's idea? Just asking...

 

[ny-tech]

I fully agree. In fact, I do not think blockers go far enough. Far too often news sites will co-mingle fake sponsored news along with actual news. I find this practice abhorrent.

FYI, I use ad-block-plus and on the Tom's site I get periodically challenged by some automated process that detects suspicious behavior. I get taken to a page requiring a "captcha" entry to continue.

 

[Pailin]

Some time back I tried white listing Tom's, did not last long and quickly reRedded it.

Do Not run ads that Auto Play Sound !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

and the same Bloody ads again and agin and again and again (with sound and video) for each News item clicked on. What kind of Sadist would push that on their Worst Enemy -.-"""


(let alone poor laptops with limited RAM to host So MANY ads that it grinds to a halt)





.....Maybe, just Maybe I will oneday try white listing Tom's again..... maybe.

 

[razor512]

Very good writeup.

The advertisements here have become much less of an issue than some in the past. I remember some covering the full screen.

A more recent one was this(covering part of the article), but least digikey is useful to me since I make orders from them from time to time.

What are your thoughts on the minefield/ IEDs that tomshardware and tomsguide uses on their articles. Other than the malware ads (advertising downright malicious software such as registry cleaners and driver updaters), the minefield is one of the main reasons why I block the ads.

 

[Christopher1]

Tom's is a funny website: I block ALL adware, and Tom's keeps redirecting me to some lame "Captcha" screen, claiming my PC is doing something suspicious.

Yeah, something suspicious, like blocking ads.

Nasty folks, these. Is this Avram's idea? Just asking...

I doubt that you are getting directed to a Captcha because of blocking ads. I block all of them and I am not getting that.
It's possible that your PC is sending no referrer header, a lot of websites today hate that.

 

[randomizer]

Tom's is a funny website: I block ALL adware, and Tom's keeps redirecting me to some lame "Captcha" screen, claiming my PC is doing something suspicious.

Yeah, something suspicious, like blocking ads.

Nasty folks, these. Is this Avram's idea? Just asking...

You are probably running Ghostery or something along those lines. If so, you need to allow anything from Distil Networks. It's an anti-botting measure, and it clearly thinks you're a bot.

 

[house70]

Good article, but incomplete. There should be emphasis on how plenty of ads embed malicious code, and using an adblock is about keeping one's PC secure; also, there should be mention of how ads eat data, and in a world where wireless provides nickel and dime us for every bit, every bit counts. Again, money that are being paid by consumers, not by ad providers nor by ad-infested sites.

I would put up with ads if they were paying for my bandwidth (remember Netzero days?) They don't, so I block them.

 

[Pailin]

Not to forget how Extremely carelessly the ads are coded... with not even that many tabs open my i5 laptop quickly ends up with easily 50% + CPU usage and the fan having to rev up loud to keep it cool.

Feel sorry for anyone with a lesser laptop than my semi modern one with the ads we have to put up with today !