Yes, can you make the ads at least a little more obvious? In newspapers, and on some websites, there’s a little “Advertisement” notice above such things. On this site I would still look at some of them, as they are usually interesting gadgets.
1 Like
As far as I can tell, they claim to do that. The problem is that they use a ridiculously narrow definition of “advertisement.”
I see Boing Boing as a kind of Dove of the web: a thin veneer of being alternative and giving a shit, but in the end of the day hardly anything is to low for them.
4 Likes
That’s a feature, not a bug.
And I’m with you, if the page starts to misbehave, I’m out.
6 Likes
You certainly can; that’s the very first thing I do after installing Firefox.
Not Privacybadger, though, unfortunately; has anyone got it to work on Firefox/Android?
Ok, I’m confused. On the one hand you’re saying about how people are better at sensing and not being sensed, and that one way to do advertising is to have (for example) your phone not give out lots of information and not having large collections of information and doing targeted advertising.
But then you say you want to save online advertising? I think a much better question is why anyone would want to even bother to save it in the first place.
I don’t like advertising. Both you and I are intelligent people – do we really even need advertising? Do I really need some idiot trying to tell me about something which apparently I must have but yet I’ve supposedly never even thought of getting and along with all of the psycho-research that goes with it?
You know I’m also the person who is paying for my internet connection btw. An advertisier pays nothing yet gets to put junk on my screen. In addition, advertising distracts me and stops me from trying to think about whatever it is I’m trying to think about. It’s a constant disruption – as a quick test, try and watch a film on TV where they have continious ad breaks. It ruins the whole flow of the film.
And before anyone chirps up and gives the old example of (for example) buying a dvd and saying “if you skip the ads you’re stealing the content” then what if I have to visit the toilet during which time the ads are playing, or if even I sit through all the worthless adverts and decide none of them intrest me. Am I still “stealing”?
I block adverts and I will continue to do so. And no I’m not going to turn off my ad blocker just because some website demands that I do so. If they carry on doing that – it’s entirely up to them but I just won’t use that website any more. It is a fiction that you have to see advertising.
Since IHMO the problem will only get worse and not better I’ve long thought about how long it’ll be before I need to “invert” what I’m currently doing btw. That is - right now, allow the whole internet but block specific websites which serve adverts and junk. Will I in a decade from now be forced to “invert” this – block the entire internet, and just allow those few websites that are ok?
Also advertisers - and the companies that employ them have shown themselves to also be abusive. I don’t but if you live in the US, remember when cable TV was flagged as the newest way to get high quality TV with no ads? Just pay a subscription and there you go - and ad free. Now you’re paying for the same thing but that definition of “ad-free” is being pushed very hard.
I’m sorry, but it isn’t “how to save online advertising”. It is “why would you even want to do such a thing?”.
One last point, and I apologise for going slightly off topic. I understand that this website is using 4 trackers - quantserve (tracking), scorecardresearch (online surveys), discourse and google analytics. 4 isn’t many compared to some sites I’ve seen/heard about – some have 20+ but that’s 4 places too many watching, analysing, tracking and eventually serving me adverts. Do not want.
ljones
8 Likes
Exactly what I was going to suggest. In fact this is my #1 reason for blocking ads.
edit: And the main reason I always suggest ad blockers to friends and family, especially those who are somewhat naive about the nefarious nature of the net.
3 Likes
With Adblock, Ghostery, and NoScript turned up to the max on my Firefox install, and with PrefBar letting me switch images, Java, and Flash on/off with single clicks, I doubt if I’ll ever notice whether online advertising has been saved, or not.
3 Likes
Ads are the pox and blight of the internet.
Anything we can do to destroy this model and force a switch to something more sustainable would be a huge boon for all of us.
Ads have always sucked in almost all forms. When content providers start depending on ads for money you see a distinct downward shift in the quality and type of content they provide. The viewer/reader is no longer the client, they are no longer selling quality content to the viewer, rather they are selling the viewers eyeballs to the real client the advertisers.
With this shift you start to see other insidious things, like clickbait, because they are selling out looks/views. Clickbait doesn’t happen when there isn’t an ad driven cycle. The creation process shifts from best quality content to what will draw views without pissing off our advertisers. There is also an ethics level that all too often gets compromised…we can’t run that story because they are our biggest advertisers, etc. Third party ads also are serious security risks and frequently exploited. Not to mention that ads are rude and are attempting to siphon off the hard earned money of the working class for products they otherwise most likely wouldn’t need or want.
I’d rather see sites have a store and a donation button with a yearly or monthly goal marker, allowing us to support them directly, putting us back in place as the client, ensuring that we are provided quality content that is of value to us. Even a care to support us, please consider clicking here to view a few ads, and having that add to the monthly/yearly support goal would be a better option then intrusive ads.
Ads are the worst.
8 Likes
Get viewers to pay. Heh.
Ads are part of the deal.
Ads just need a bit of curation. They can’t remain blindly automated.
They are hated for the obvious “You are the One Millionth viewer!” bad scams and embedded hacking attempts and so forth.
I’m not bothered by a little banner spruiking a product. Just don’t scam me.
1 Like
I would put forward that ads aren’t the viewer paying for content, but rather the viewer being sold to a company that is paying the content provider so that they can extract a much higher amount from the viewer. It that crucial distinction shifts the dynamic in insidious ways.
The reason that advertisers pay is because they are siphoning off a much greater amount of money from the viewers through tricks of psychology and consumerism. If you analyze this cycle the cost to the viewer and the environment ends up being much much higher then a direct support model, and the unintended side consequences I’ve mentioned previously are unacceptable for honest journalism.
9 Likes
What he is really saying is how do we afford to continue to produce content? Ads are one means. Paywalls and site subscriptions are another. Working for free is an option for some.
Just curious, how do you suggest BB and it’s staff pay both their business and person expenses if they dumped all ads?
And just to be clear. I hate the ads just as much as you I just don’t know of another alternative at this time other than making people pay for a subscription or maybe pay for every article they read.
Or smaller quirky sites go broke and the only content providers left are big corporations that just look at the web as a giant billboard and we are then even worse off than now.
1 Like
Ads aren’t part of the deal when anyone can easily switch them off. I’ve used Adblock ever since there was an Adblock, and there’s no going back. There’s no reason for online ads to exist- the only incentive not to block them is to support a site that you like, and if I’m going to do that, I’ll donate to them instead if they give me the option. This is not negotiable- ads clutter up my browser, eat up bandwidth, and put me at risk for malware, in addition to annoying the everliving fuck out of me, and give absolutely nothing in return.
I get that people not paying for content is a problem, but advertising is powerless here, and I’m very much okay with that. As sargemisfit pointed out, it’s not like there’s any shortage of other places advertising can (and will) be placed, and it’s nice to have a single place where the consumer controls whether or not they see it.
If online advertising were to be forced on me, the only way I’d tolerate it is if it were unobtrusive- no moving images, no sound, no popups. Ideally, no images whatsoever, just plain text in a tiny font. But I’d turn even that off if I had a choice- it still provides nothing for me other than a way to automatically support a site, and I’d rather do that consciously and by choice.
3 Likes
How to save online advertising? That’s easy, just use this one weird trick…
9 Likes
I can’t be the only one here on BBS willing to throw some actual cash (not PPC or any other bullshit) to support content and a community I like.
Put up a subscription for a few bucks a month and in return strip out the ads, UrbanDaddy, trackers, StackSocial, and bullfuckingshit Amazon referrals and I’d be MUCH happier. Certainly they’re not getting a cent from me now since I block ads and trackers and don’t click any Amazon links. Fuck that noise. Hell, take a page from Futility Closet and use Patreon!
What we really need is a way to support Ars, BB, and other decent sites with one payment a month.
6 Likes
WillingVal_1
AbleVal_0
2 Likes
A couple of solutions, I think, would make everyone more agreeable:
- Ads should, by law, be tagged as ads, fully traceable and approved by their source (i.e., no claiming “We didn’t know the ad would infect your PC…it’s the ad company’s fault!”).
- No counting ads against the target’s data usage in any capacity.
- Flash or Javascript or any other add-in style would be disallowed, ads to only be served via HTML5 or other agreed upon (somewhat) safer methods.
- Sound is off by default.
- No constant loops / motion.
- Overlays must conform to standard window design (X for close in the upper-right corner).
- Links must be obvious, not hidden.
In return, I won’t put on ad-blockers. I don’t do it for all the sites that are already compliant to my wish-list. There are plenty, actually. Seriously, feel free to tell me, “If you turn of ad-blockers, we’ll let you see the content.” Just don’t expect me to tolerate you blasting a trumpet in my ear.
I mean, I still get magazines. I don’t sit there and tear out all the ads before reading them, but they also don’t pop-up and smack in me in the face, either.
2 Likes
"The boom in ad-blocking technology is driven by three factors: annoyance at the content of ads; annoyance at the effect of ads in slowing computers to a crawl and worries about privacy. "
And the fact that malware has been known to use ads as a vector.
4 Likes
They would if they could though. That’s a problem of the medium, not an absence of desire to do so.
3 Likes
Scent samples are the bane of my existence. My mother used to bring fashion and pop magazines home all the time. Nobody seemed to figure out that the migraines and vomiting always began as soon as they’d come within scent-shot of me.
Axe bombs in high school were pretty bad for me too.
I have a sensitive nose, but I have no problem with most smells found out in the world besides the overpowering wretched reek of perfumery.
8 Likes
