- Status
TallestJon96
Estimable
- Dec 27, 2014
- 5
- 0
- 4,510
jpishgar
VP, Global Community
- Jan 5, 2010
- 252
- 9
- 18,965
Hey there all,
A few items worth noting as the discussion here gets lively.
• The author's opinion is not the official stance of Tom's Guide or Purch.
The piece is absolutely opinion editorial, and raises a few good points - but it isn't an assertion of how we feel at the company level or even the team level. As a company, our stance as I've come to understand it is that we're okay with our readers using ad-blocking software. We're prefer you didn't, but we're not in a position to dictate to you. We work to keep our content as high value as we can, and to keep our ads unobtrusive (and follow-up aggressively on removing them when they aren't). It'd be nice of you to whitelist us, but even if you don't, we'll be fine. A lot of times I ask for community events and things to be made into ads for insertion here and there on the site, and a lot of people don't end up seeing them because of blocking. It makes me sad, but ultimately, you have to do what you have to do as a user.
Our official stance on the matter is that a) we acknowledge that users use ad blocking, b) we cast no judgment for or against on the use of it, and, c) if you do use it, whitelist us if you like our content enough to desire a similar amount of it / more of it in the future. It's a pretty straightforward approach, and one most would agree with is a sensible one.
• The author is not a corporate shill.
I had a belly-laugh about that one. Avram is one of the smartest people in our company, and has never said anything even remotely shill-like. He has ranted to me a few times about struggles on the backend with the CMS, and is often the first one to bring things to the attention of the people above on the totem pole, but he's the furthest thing from shill I can think of. The ad people at Purch don't get to post on the forums, but they do get the erstwhile angry/angsty/agitated emails from me when a bad ad sneaks into the mix. Functionally, I or the other members of the community team would probably qualify as the definition of a "shill" presenting an unbiased opinion in place of something objective, except that we serve two masters as Community staff - the user community at large AND Purch. Positing sell-out assertions for the sake of serving one of those would inevitably betray the other. Avram, as a member of the Editorial team, operates behind a hundred-foot wall between Editorial and Ad Sales meticulously constructed to preserve the Tom's pedigree of no pay-for-play and speaking truth to power (in this case, OEMs with sizable ad budgets). That wall is mentioned repeatedly in our corporate material and supported by everyone at the C-suite level, I might add. The op ed article is his opinion, uncolored by revenue graphs.
• My own take is different, as is that of others.
Are you reading this in the forums? If you aren't, check them out. If you are a registered user on the forums, you'll note that there are no ads. Why? Because a while back, my team asked for and got this for users. If you are going to be cool enough to hang out with us and post, you get no ads in the forum. We get enough traffic to support ourselves, so we can turn them off for our actual active, involved users and not have a problem with it. My take is and has always been the fewer ads the better.
That said, I'm rather keen on paying the mortgage and short of going paywall or subscription (both of which are horrible), ads is how we do that for that staff that keeps the place running. If you dig us enough to read us often, consider whitelisting us. We don't *need* you to, but it would be nice to do to give back to a site you spend a lot of time on and who has content you value. If you don't, though, that's cool - that's cool. We'll be fine. My take on it is a bit more laid back than Avram's. I understand the importance of displaying ads so that the site operates and has money to do things like hire and pay reporters, but I also get that users want a clean browsing experience unfettered by solicitations for hair care products and dog treats. There's a middle ground somewhere there where we do the best we can on our end to get ads relevant to your actual wants, and they aren't intrusive enough to your experience that it makes you hate them (or us). And we also ask you sometimes to whitelist us, because asking for a sliver of monetized attention from a vast number of people is way, way better than asking for a monthly subscription from a few thousand or selling coupons for the component or gadget we've just "totally objectively unbiased-ly" reviewed.
Hope this clarifies a few things from our end.
-JP
Side note: Please keep comments constructive, whether in support or opposition. Personal attacks never fly here, whether vs. other users or staff. Civility is, as always, compulsory.
A few items worth noting as the discussion here gets lively.
• The author's opinion is not the official stance of Tom's Guide or Purch.
The piece is absolutely opinion editorial, and raises a few good points - but it isn't an assertion of how we feel at the company level or even the team level. As a company, our stance as I've come to understand it is that we're okay with our readers using ad-blocking software. We're prefer you didn't, but we're not in a position to dictate to you. We work to keep our content as high value as we can, and to keep our ads unobtrusive (and follow-up aggressively on removing them when they aren't). It'd be nice of you to whitelist us, but even if you don't, we'll be fine. A lot of times I ask for community events and things to be made into ads for insertion here and there on the site, and a lot of people don't end up seeing them because of blocking. It makes me sad, but ultimately, you have to do what you have to do as a user.
Our official stance on the matter is that a) we acknowledge that users use ad blocking, b) we cast no judgment for or against on the use of it, and, c) if you do use it, whitelist us if you like our content enough to desire a similar amount of it / more of it in the future. It's a pretty straightforward approach, and one most would agree with is a sensible one.
• The author is not a corporate shill.
I had a belly-laugh about that one. Avram is one of the smartest people in our company, and has never said anything even remotely shill-like. He has ranted to me a few times about struggles on the backend with the CMS, and is often the first one to bring things to the attention of the people above on the totem pole, but he's the furthest thing from shill I can think of. The ad people at Purch don't get to post on the forums, but they do get the erstwhile angry/angsty/agitated emails from me when a bad ad sneaks into the mix. Functionally, I or the other members of the community team would probably qualify as the definition of a "shill" presenting an unbiased opinion in place of something objective, except that we serve two masters as Community staff - the user community at large AND Purch. Positing sell-out assertions for the sake of serving one of those would inevitably betray the other. Avram, as a member of the Editorial team, operates behind a hundred-foot wall between Editorial and Ad Sales meticulously constructed to preserve the Tom's pedigree of no pay-for-play and speaking truth to power (in this case, OEMs with sizable ad budgets). That wall is mentioned repeatedly in our corporate material and supported by everyone at the C-suite level, I might add. The op ed article is his opinion, uncolored by revenue graphs.
• My own take is different, as is that of others.
Are you reading this in the forums? If you aren't, check them out. If you are a registered user on the forums, you'll note that there are no ads. Why? Because a while back, my team asked for and got this for users. If you are going to be cool enough to hang out with us and post, you get no ads in the forum. We get enough traffic to support ourselves, so we can turn them off for our actual active, involved users and not have a problem with it. My take is and has always been the fewer ads the better.
That said, I'm rather keen on paying the mortgage and short of going paywall or subscription (both of which are horrible), ads is how we do that for that staff that keeps the place running. If you dig us enough to read us often, consider whitelisting us. We don't *need* you to, but it would be nice to do to give back to a site you spend a lot of time on and who has content you value. If you don't, though, that's cool - that's cool. We'll be fine. My take on it is a bit more laid back than Avram's. I understand the importance of displaying ads so that the site operates and has money to do things like hire and pay reporters, but I also get that users want a clean browsing experience unfettered by solicitations for hair care products and dog treats. There's a middle ground somewhere there where we do the best we can on our end to get ads relevant to your actual wants, and they aren't intrusive enough to your experience that it makes you hate them (or us). And we also ask you sometimes to whitelist us, because asking for a sliver of monetized attention from a vast number of people is way, way better than asking for a monthly subscription from a few thousand or selling coupons for the component or gadget we've just "totally objectively unbiased-ly" reviewed.
Hope this clarifies a few things from our end.
-JP
Side note: Please keep comments constructive, whether in support or opposition. Personal attacks never fly here, whether vs. other users or staff. Civility is, as always, compulsory.
Toms Hardware has what is probable the most complete selection of odious web advertising collection you could muster in one place.
From automatically starting Adverts in the middle of text to mouse over links to pop up adds it is minefield of advertising sparsely populated with useful text.
Advertising is OK, but most websites it has become intrusive to the main reason to be on the site and frankly gets in the way of good journalism rather than supporting it.
If large companies stopped buying sites for silly money so they have to milk the advertising revenue to get their money back and showed more restraint in both purchase price and advertising the world be better place.
As for the ad blockers that charge let ads through, they are just scum. Either do a job properly on don't bother. Don't promise something then let the stuff you supposedly block in through the back door taking a cut on the way.
That's just wrong.
From automatically starting Adverts in the middle of text to mouse over links to pop up adds it is minefield of advertising sparsely populated with useful text.
Advertising is OK, but most websites it has become intrusive to the main reason to be on the site and frankly gets in the way of good journalism rather than supporting it.
If large companies stopped buying sites for silly money so they have to milk the advertising revenue to get their money back and showed more restraint in both purchase price and advertising the world be better place.
As for the ad blockers that charge let ads through, they are just scum. Either do a job properly on don't bother. Don't promise something then let the stuff you supposedly block in through the back door taking a cut on the way.
That's just wrong.
jimmysmitty
Distinguished
- Oct 5, 2007
- 551
- 0
- 19,010
jpishgar, It is good to hear that. I do hope it remains civil. Had to clear out a few comments as no matter how I feel there is no need for a personal attack. That's the great thing about the interwebs, it is much like the US. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and weather you like it or not it is theirs and theirs alone.
Good post JP but after coming here for 15 years, I'd say 90% of your readers are poor wanna-be's that have enthusiast hardware minds that doesn't think anything good is worth more than $100. 70% of your readers are most likely hackers/pirates/crackers/anit-DRM who will bypass anything Paywise and find another place to go. If going Pay-To-Read, the site will probably fail. But we do understand this is a business that needs income of some kind.
Just lower the amount of Ads on this site and your mortgage will be safe. I mean scrolling through 119 comments and watching the counter climb on how many it blocked is just astounding. Legit to what I am interested in or not, 79 ads on 1 story is a TAD too many.
I mean, look at all the people who WOULD put you on a white list if there weren't so many it was utterly distracting... as it is. Your Ad revenue would climb. For now, it seems this site is over compensating for the blocking by making 1 out of every 50 or so who adblock see everything adblockers don't.
Geeks like us crave the new stuff. Reading what they are capable of, their limitations and a special at Cracker Barrel and a sale at Baby's-R-Us just don't go together.
Just my 2 cents. The %'s above are just pulled out of my arse from reading comments for past 15 years.
Just lower the amount of Ads on this site and your mortgage will be safe. I mean scrolling through 119 comments and watching the counter climb on how many it blocked is just astounding. Legit to what I am interested in or not, 79 ads on 1 story is a TAD too many.
I mean, look at all the people who WOULD put you on a white list if there weren't so many it was utterly distracting... as it is. Your Ad revenue would climb. For now, it seems this site is over compensating for the blocking by making 1 out of every 50 or so who adblock see everything adblockers don't.
Geeks like us crave the new stuff. Reading what they are capable of, their limitations and a special at Cracker Barrel and a sale at Baby's-R-Us just don't go together.
Just my 2 cents. The %'s above are just pulled out of my arse from reading comments for past 15 years.
Piss off. Those adds infected my system with crap recently so invasive TWO different continually on scanning systems did not detect it till it was to late. So craptastic that it even disabled chrome's ability to auto update itself and started installing other add related programs that began to appear in the programs list. Now i run adblock non stop.And I only go to about a dozen total websites. Ive caught invasive adds on sites like THG and CNN before. I dont take the chance these days.
funguseater
Distinguished
- Sep 20, 2009
- 53
- 0
- 18,590
We need a Digital Millennium Consumer Act to send automatic take down notices to AD servers that steal my bandwidth with monstrous popups and click-hijacks. They brought it on themselves, can't wait till we have AR that can "paint" over real world ADs. I buy what I want not what some PR hipster thinks I should buy.
Oh, the poor advertisers!?? Give me a break they are the most obtrusive and annoying things on the planet out side of the tea party and Fox "News". I'm waiting for them to start putting advertising on toilet paper next. Or perhaps feed a mother with the right diet so she can have a baby born with the hospitals name on it's ass. They send you adverting on your cells wasting minutes. Every were you look there are signs advertising something. On this page are ads every where. Heck in articles there are words if you happen to mouse over you spend 2 minutes try to close the stupid pop ups. You know what is also annoying? Bugs but at least they are trying to suck your wallet dry with junk. I love Ad Blocker and I wish it worked even better.
wiyosaya
Distinguished
- Apr 12, 2006
- 396
- 0
- 18,930
On Tom's Hardware, links to "read comments in the forums" are always there. On Tom's Guide, where this article is actually posted, links to "read comments in the forums" are never there. Tom's IT - well forget that since comments are through third-party sites.
How about making all the sites consistent and having a "read comments in the forums" link on every article. Then maybe your registered uses would do so.
That you had to post this is something that I find amusing. It should be policy that an OP-ED piece state the author does not necessarily reflect the opinions of Tom's whatever. To me, that would be the mark of a professional site, or a professional author should they state that without such a policy.
Side note:
I've read most of the comments, and I agree with most of them. Unless some were moderated out, I do not recall someone personally attacking the author. I think your readers are among the more sophisticated and, in my opinion, do not need to be told to play nice. As I see it, the more sophisticated who are actually honorable in their intentions do not appreciate being treated like children in being told "be nice kiddies."
withtheeye
Honorable
- Jan 16, 2013
- 1
- 0
- 10,510
"Every time you block an ad, what you're really blocking is food from entering a child's mouth. "
Really??? After you told us that ADBLOCK was one of the BEST chrome extensions??? Maybe use of AD BLOCK was your idea in the first place???
http
/www.tomsguide.com/us/pictures-story/283-8-best-google-chrome-extensions.html
Really??? After you told us that ADBLOCK was one of the BEST chrome extensions??? Maybe use of AD BLOCK was your idea in the first place???
http
/www.tomsguide.com/us/pictures-story/283-8-best-google-chrome-extensions.htmlNo, you do not have a right to my bandwidth. No, you do not have a right to my time. No, you do not have a right to my attention.
Neither do telemarketers. That's why I have a blocking device for them also.
Neither does television. That's why I only watch recorded hows and skip the advertising.
Refusing your "service" is not theft. You are an absolute idiot if you think it is.
Neither do telemarketers. That's why I have a blocking device for them also.
Neither does television. That's why I only watch recorded hows and skip the advertising.
Refusing your "service" is not theft. You are an absolute idiot if you think it is.
Narcissistic_Martyr
Honorable
- Aug 15, 2013
- 15
- 0
- 10,570
I do PC repair and guess what, clicking on bad ads and drive by attacks in flash based ads are a serious problem. So, guess what. All of my customers now use ad blocking technology. Otherwise they could well be out hundreds of dollars again not to mention risk having their identities compromised. When the onlne ad industry no longer uses flash based ads and no longer uses deceptive ads that redirect you to sites that infect your PC I will consider not using ad block technology.
In short, you want us to read your ads? Make them universally harmless, without deception, and don't break the flow of my content (think newspaper ads or magazine ads or TV type ads after say 15 minutes of programming).
In short, you want us to read your ads? Make them universally harmless, without deception, and don't break the flow of my content (think newspaper ads or magazine ads or TV type ads after say 15 minutes of programming).
wiyosaya
Distinguished
- Apr 12, 2006
- 396
- 0
- 18,930
ABP with the element hiding ad-on will block those hot word ads without blocking the words.
Somehow, I just don't think the people at any Tom's site get it. Spam got so bad that the US passed the CAN-SPAM act. Part of the reason that this happened is because receiving spam actually costs the spam receiver more to receive it than it costs the sender to send it. Like stated in other comments, when the size of a web page goes to 10 or more times its base size because of the ads, it is definitely costing at least some of the users more than it cost the web site to post it. If advertisers keep pushing things, someone will decide to pass a law that in some way limits advertising. Personally, I would love to see an opt-in site, but such is like seeing a unicorn on this planet anyway.
I run an ad-blocker on this site. I have painstakingly created element blockers so my mouse does not accidentally pop up a dozen or more ads per article that I have to navigate around and that waste my time. From time to time, I turn it off on this site. I find it absolutely amazing that anyone would even remotely consider reading this site without an ad-blocker. Have anyone of you at Tom's read this site without an ad-blocker recently? Do you guys have hosts files that block ad URLs? All of you at Tom's should try reading this site without any kind of ad blocking for a day just so that you are on an even keel with the people who read this site. After you have done that, then come back and preach to us what you have just practiced. Really, Tom's, I do not think you have any idea what this site is like without an ad-blocker.
Lastly, if you want us to view this site without an ad-blocker, then hire someone who's sole job is to review all advertising and ensure and guarantee us that it will not contain any malware. Even malware blockers do not always catch the latest exploits all the time.
One day, I spent about four hours de-crapifying my 86-year old father-in-law's computer that had been infected with all kinds of malware, browser hijackers and other things that he has no idea how it got on his computer and he has no idea not because of memory loss - AND he has anti-malware software installed. I will say it one more time - I really don't think that your understanding of the situation is complete.
A couple of years back, one of Time Warner Cable's execs publicly stated that he thought everyone should be forced to watch commercials. In my opinion, this article rates along side that exec's position.
This author did do one thing right though.
He introduced me to uBlock for Chrome. It's personally a bit better than AdBlock.
It has definitely improved my browsing experience.
Give it a try yourself: https
/chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm?hl=enThanks Ed!
speedforce131
Estimable
- May 8, 2015
- 1
- 0
- 4,510
bigpinkdragon286
Distinguished
- Oct 3, 2012
- 229
- 0
- 18,910
Sounds like a philosophical debate.
Advertising has become horribly abusive. When my nearly 80 year old mother complains to me about being shown a half-naked girl, just because she scrolled past the end of the article she was reading, I would say we have a problem.
Sites like Tom's has gone way overboard in how they utilize the privilege of ad generated revenue. "Oh look, I sneezed and bumped my mouse, now I have an ad popping up in the middle of the article because a word was underlined!" Do you realize that most readers do not want to navigate a mine-field with their mouse? Tech articles are not supposed to be more stressful than video games.
Ad blocking isn't the best option, but it's one of the options that we have. Just telling us to stop blocking your ads is about the worst approach you can take to the situation.
I block ads as a means of proactive self-defense. You started this, Tom's, and if you want it to stop, clean up your act. I can live without you, but you can't live without users. Like everything else in this universe, if you can't adapt to the reality in which you exist, you eventually won't.
Advertising has become horribly abusive. When my nearly 80 year old mother complains to me about being shown a half-naked girl, just because she scrolled past the end of the article she was reading, I would say we have a problem.
Sites like Tom's has gone way overboard in how they utilize the privilege of ad generated revenue. "Oh look, I sneezed and bumped my mouse, now I have an ad popping up in the middle of the article because a word was underlined!" Do you realize that most readers do not want to navigate a mine-field with their mouse? Tech articles are not supposed to be more stressful than video games.
Ad blocking isn't the best option, but it's one of the options that we have. Just telling us to stop blocking your ads is about the worst approach you can take to the situation.
I block ads as a means of proactive self-defense. You started this, Tom's, and if you want it to stop, clean up your act. I can live without you, but you can't live without users. Like everything else in this universe, if you can't adapt to the reality in which you exist, you eventually won't.
Nick s Hardware
Estimable
- May 22, 2015
- 2
- 0
- 4,510
I have read Toms for many years now, I have followed it's advice and have learnt much, trust me when my PC has an issue, I come to you guys, that is invaluable to me.
I even used to enjoy the targeted advertising for my interests. But now when I visit toms, via android or PC, I have a full page advert (currently Emirates) wasting my GB limit, making web pages hard to read because the format is mangled by the browser, images jumping around and generally making what was an easily accessible web page difficult.
Am I stealing? No, I'm imploring you guys to find new ways to generate revenue and not stoop to [showing too many] ADS. right now I'm seeing advertising for chicago forum, emirates, red hot fares and some video that after 10 seconds hasn't just told me NOTHING about itself but has also STOLEN my limited GB which I pay an extortionate amount for. Be different, please be different from the rest. ads aren't your money source, YOUR VIEWERS ARE.
[Brackets are mod edits. Made due to cursing]
I even used to enjoy the targeted advertising for my interests. But now when I visit toms, via android or PC, I have a full page advert (currently Emirates) wasting my GB limit, making web pages hard to read because the format is mangled by the browser, images jumping around and generally making what was an easily accessible web page difficult.
Am I stealing? No, I'm imploring you guys to find new ways to generate revenue and not stoop to [showing too many] ADS. right now I'm seeing advertising for chicago forum, emirates, red hot fares and some video that after 10 seconds hasn't just told me NOTHING about itself but has also STOLEN my limited GB which I pay an extortionate amount for. Be different, please be different from the rest. ads aren't your money source, YOUR VIEWERS ARE.
[Brackets are mod edits. Made due to cursing]
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Question What laptop should I get if i’m going into Criminal Justice Major?
- Started by girenho
- Replies: 0
-
Question Best way to sell a macbook that needs repairs?
- Started by chnniten
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter