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: annoyances, blogging, web 2.0