« Home | 20102007 » | How to ban SUVs from city streets. » | Meaningful Diatribes » | Gizmodo.com had a contest to win an iPhone. The ru... » | Eight Simple Things » | The Rules of Strip Scrabble » | Are Home Espresso Machines A Good Investment? » | Oh golly I'm gonna be RICH! » | Are release dates considered "Advertising?" » | Offshoring: Destroying America's Ground Floor »

View/Don't View my ads

I have AdSense and Chitika on both my blogs. They don't give enough income to support the blogging entirely, but I'm OK with that. I figure the shortfall is because I don't put up enough high-traffic content. That inspires me to do better.

I stumbled across WhyFirefoxIsBlocked.com some time ago. They say that Firefox promotes ad-blocking software and viewing content without downloading the ads equates to "stealing" from the content producers. That pissed me off. As an ad-supported publisher, am I egotistical enough to call ad-blockers thieves?

Let's follow the slippery slope:
  • While viewing web pages, you cannot operate your computer until ads are finished displaying.
  • While watching TV, you cannot walk away during commercials.
  • While listening to the radio, you cannot use the power or volume buttons during commercials.
  • While driving your car, it automatically slows as you pass billboards to give you time to read them.
Thank you but no.

Even as an ad-supported publisher, I fully support the right of my readers to choose to download (or to not download) anything they wish. The closest I will ever come to actual ad intrusion is to logo articles, images, or video with sponsors. None of these will take away from the content itself. As for any ad-supported entity who insists that the ads be viewed: If your content is that important to you, make it subscription-only. If you provide good enough content, people will subscribe. If no one subscribes - you know why.

Labels: , ,

Posted by thoughtfix on Sunday, December 2, 2007 at 1:34 PM |

This is what I like about the Internet - the stuff has to come into our computers, and that gives us control.

I routinely block adverts with a proxy (privoxy) and AdblockPlus. It's for the simple reason that I don't really care about whatever the adverts are showing - even if I wasn't blocking them, I'd just ignore them.

I also really really hate Flash adverts and those irritating DHTML boxes that appear over the page content.

being accused of "stealing" is a bit harsh, it's like being accused of "stealing" because you didn't buy whatever brand of shampoo the scantily clad ladies on tv are showing off. People with that kind of thinking are evidently trying to make up for a poor site by ramming it with adverts in the hope someone will follow them. Kind of reminds me of those poor quality digital TV channels with an advert every 10 minutes.

I also have ads on my sites, but also don't really mind if people browse my site with them blocked.

Posted by Blogger James | December 3, 2007 4:55 AM  

There is a project from Phillips (a french worldwide company) to create a new concept where user cannot zap publicity.

Posted by Blogger Benoît | December 13, 2007 12:05 AM  

@benoit.
The only Philips I know is a Dutch (different country) worldwide company and since they sold PolyGram they have been putting out products that don't restrict the user.

Posted by Blogger Quindo | December 13, 2007 12:21 AM  

Old entry, but I just came by while doing some "checking up on how Dan's doing" link-hopping. =) This is much appreciated-philsophy you have, and if I could *find* your ads, I'd click them to give you some support. Largely because you're my friend, but also in great support of this mentality of consumer choice. Maybe I don't see them because Firefox is blocking them... ha.

Posted by Blogger Chelonia | July 30, 2008 9:03 AM  

Post a Comment