Google Contributor lets public pay to remove ads from select websites


#1

[Permalink]


#2

I think the implementation of this tool will hinder the usage - I loathe ads mostly because they clutter my reading experience, with broken paragraphs and an interrupted text flow.

If I understand Google’s description instead of removing the ads they will still block the place for a “pixel pattern” or some other message. Browsing will be better without “looks like an explosion in a colour factory” banners, but even white space instead of ads are annoying.

Nah, thanks, I will pass this one.


#3

Just download adBlocker but also add their Element Hider add-on (i forget the exact name but its something along those lines). I mean the point of Contributor is to support a site without having to resort to ads. I hate ads so i run adBlocker, and i might consider using Contributor. If the Thank You message is annoying i can always just hide the image entirely.


#4

If it’s truly a low-contrast greyscale pattern (as the illustration shows) it would appeal to me as a web site user. Obviously a separate ad-free rendering would be even better, but I think the idea is that this will make having a subscription option accessible to websites which might not otherwise have the resources to collect subscriptions, maintain seperate ad and ad-free layouts, and so forth. It might force me to make a decision rather than use adblock for everything.


#5

I would actually like a “No Ads on Youtube” option. I’m not really sure how this would work across multiple channels and how Google could compensate them if i view different people’s content but don’t want to see ads.

The proble is easily fixed on my home PC because i do use adBlocker, but on my phone and on my work PC i have no way of blocking the ads and it drives me insane. Especially when i’m listening to music playlists and Youtube decides to constantly interrupt me with 30 second ads.


#6

Who gets the money I wonder? I use adblock plus at home, and I’d rather use that than to swell Google’s coffers. If it keeps a log of exactly where I’ve looked, and pays a small income to the sites who’ve ads I’ve blocked then I can see it getting into No Not Follow territory. Some sites do have pretty distateful ads, but do I want google keeping a log of exactly what I’ve looked at? Which they probably do, but I can at least not know about it.


#7

People read Wikihow on purpose?


#8

Ug, now google has a direct incentive to work out how to stop adblockers working… This does not bode well.


#9

Hopefully they’ll police the sites carefully, otherwise unscrupulous sites will take the money and still show ads, and users will decide it’s not worth taking part.


#10

Well, I think that is why Google is implementing it as they do: the websites have set places in their layout for ads, so it isn’t within Google’s power to collapse those blocks in the DOM. But they do have full control of what goes into the adspace, so the site owner has as little control as before.

There will be a sort of transition period, I expect, whilst the designers and the UX devs at the various sites re-optimise for a tempered layout (ads/thank you block), but Google’s current strategy seems sound.


#11

Do they? If you pay into Contribute, then Google will get the GET request from the browser, so it will make a tick on that page that you with a “contributed” cookie set visited Site X, so Site X gets another Credit from the pot.

Google has always had an interest in playing nice with adblockers, since they want to make their ads the sort that you don’t want to block. Ads you want to see are better for them and better for those buying the ads.


#12

I am shocked that a major ad provider seems to imply that sponsored consumer information content may impact your reading experience negatively.


#13

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.