"You are seeing this message because ad or script blocking software is interfering with this page"

I’ll take a spot on the list too, please.

Is it? I’ve been on BB regularly for over 10 years and I’d happily kick some money via patreon or similar. There are a lot of regulars.


If you’re using uBlock, these rules should block the Contributor requests, the popover, and the yellow overlay at the bottom of the screen (at least for now):


These will keep you from having to disable inline scripts.


At this point using Google Contributor seems more like an effort to get BB’s disproportionately privacy and tech savvy audience to turn off their script blockers, but from reading this thread it seems like it will have the unintended (and entirely predicable) consequence of having many of those same tech savvy people just tweak their script blockers or abandon the site entirely. And if that number of people is small, then BB wasn’t loosing much ad revenue to them in the first place.

If BB is metrics driven, as I assume it is, it will be curious to see what happens with the implementation of Google Contributor a few weeks or months down the line when they check their metrics. Will the ad revenue be up or down overall? I imagine Google revenue could go up even if page views go down (because of some people unblocking scripting and seeing Google ads) but that the native advertising of StackSocial/BoingBoing Store and Amazon Affiliate links may decrease. Only time, and metrics, will tell. But I think the rather conspicuous lack of broad success for the 4 year-old Google Contributor platform does not bode well for this experiment, especially given the potential reputation costs unique to BoingBoing’s brand.


Disable any ad or script blocking software, then reload this page.

Heh. No.

Amongst the sites I visit repeatedly, BB the absolute worst for trackers and ads. There is no way I’d visit it with shields down.


I think if you know of the list’s existence then you’re probably excluded.

Ooh this worked, many thanks. Until google change the rules but it’s increasingly an arms race to stop this high-noon fuckery.

ETA: Spoke too soon, it’s already back for me.

Though this works. We have always been at war with eastasia…

After further dinking around with uBlock Origin, it looks like disabling cosmetic filtering on the site (the third button from the left on the bottom), rather than disabling javascript, gets rid of the blegging dialog without disabling YouTube videos.

Like others, I would probably be willing to pay a subscription fee for an ad-free BoingBoing. Having to pay a per-page rate via Google Contributor (whoever heard of Google Contributor before today?), on the other hand, will just encourage people to find a way around it.


Amusing thought, adblocker users tend to be relatively ok with native advertising and things like that, but things like this either drive them away or make them pay per page - to see ads.

It seems like there was a discussion awhile back about using locally-served ads. (Although I might be remembering one from some other site.) I wonder if that is just not enough ROI or still ineffective.


I wouldn’t be surprised if “locally-served” ads in practice would just be same malware vector 3d party ads called in real time by a CMS plug and sent from the BB domain/CDN servers rather than being called from the client browser. I’m not a network engineer or coder so I have no idea if that would make me more or less safe than the current system. I’m thinking less because they would be harder to filter discretely.


Maybe a link tax hedge/preparation?

Either way, it’s a nasty choice we’re faced with, if it’s ads on the one hand or Google on the other.

When people say locally served ads they mean like how they did it in the good old days: you’d be able to buy an ad on boingboing. You’d give them a .png file and a URL to link to, and they’d insert the ad. It’s much safer because the links would be manually curated. The only attack vector would be to either 1: upload a malicious png (image parser exploits do happen) or 2: give a malicious link. Theoretically whoever’s accepting the ads should check the link first, but that doesn’t stop you from having something legit up at the start then changing it to something malicious later. I’d totally be for this option and I wouldn’t be surprised if there weren’t willing advertisers for it.

ETA: it’d basically be like native advertising now, but better because it’s more honest. I’d more than happily unblock my ublock on BB if they had good old fashioned curated ads. In the current system it’s full of sketchy ads and it’s on us to report them, which just makes everyone use adblock.


You didn’t add me when I mentioned you were trying to be Allison Hannigan (maybe I shouldn’t bring that up), but I think you (or the other principle founders) should explain.
Maybe you have a really good reason?
Maybe it was ‘testing the waters’?

I think you know how long time readers feel by this point.

1 Like

As in…

1 Like

No, that’s my avatar. :smiling_imp:



I should note Allison Hannigan is awesome




Ha, I used to make banner ads. I can’t believe I’d forgotten about the old days when you’d manually make them and deliver them to individual websites…as a GIF in the 216 color web safe palette. New kids with their 8 bit per channel ads delivered by networks have no idea…they should get off my lawn!!!1!! :open_mouth:


The ironic part of this is that I only recently installed Adblock after reading so many positive articles about ad blocking on BoingBoing…

Now I can’t face going back to the internet without it, especially when in-line video ads on certain, otherwise great, sites used to run so poorly on my aging laptop.

As others have mentioned I would also very happily pay a yearly/monthly subscription to support the site.


Is anyone else not seeing this anymore? I’ve looked through the source code, and it seems that the Google Contributor code has been removed.


Conspiracy theory:

  • Run the awful “unblock or pay Google” nag screen for 24 hours.
  • Get people to whitelist BB on AdBlock, Ghostery, NoScript, HTTPS Everywhere, and all the other tools in use.
  • Remove nag screen - nobody knows, nobody unwhitelists.
  • Mission accomplished.

(Also, collate feedback from community re waters tested. Consider options. Watch this space.)


Yeah, it seems to be gone now. It’s not triggering the way it was yesterday. Someone must have changed their mind, or was trying to prove a point.

Ordering that cheap multi-meter now.