6 ms·

How do you think it all plays out if everyone decides to block ads and not pay for content?

by kosei 9y ago

TeMPOraL 9y ago
The best content - done by passionate individuals for no monetary reasons - will stay. The good content will be kept afloat by donations. The usual corporate content will be written off as "marketing expense". The ad-supported worthless crap will disappear. The Internet would become leaner, but I can't see how it would not also become better.
- lwansbrough 9y ago
  > The best content - done by passionate individuals for no monetary reasons - will stay. That's assuming these people have other jobs (which will have to somehow be funded by something other than ads or selling data -- bye bye 90% of Silicon Valley.) Having other jobs means they won't be able to spend as much time on it and quality will suffer. > The good content will be kept afloat by donations. Donations often don't stretch beyond what's required to do the work that's been done before (people don't often donate once the donation goal has been reached.) This stifles growth. > The usual corporate content will be written off as "marketing expense". So companies that derive their value from the content they produce and sell ads on have to write off their entire business model as a "marketing expense". Good idea. Say goodbye to virtually all online publishing that isn't paywalled already. > The ad-supported worthless crap will disappear. You mean like Google, YouTube, Facebook, Spotify, Twitter...?
  - dingaling 9y ago
    > You mean like Google, YouTube, Facebook, Spotify, Twitter...? Three of those provide paid-for tiers. The other two that do not, well...
beedogs 9y ago
In that situation? Optimally. It plays out optimally. If everyone suddenly installed and ran an aggressive ad-blocker, we could strangle all of the tracking networks overnight and the Internet would become a noticeably nicer place. People who refuse to concede that allowing ads is functionally the same thing as inviting third parties to monitor your browsing patterns and invade your privacy are being disingenuous.
- lwansbrough 9y ago
  Explain to me how some of the world's most popular services would operate without advertising revenue?
  - fulafel 9y ago
    It's easy to see how "the Internet would become a noticeably nicer place" could be true while "some of the world's [previously] most popular services would operate" could be false at the same time.
  - beagle3 9y ago
    That’s a cousin of the broken window fallacy, I am not sure it has a name, though. How would the horse merchants operate if everyone used cars? How would window fixers survive if there were no stones being thrown?
  - beedogs 9y ago
    They might not be able to. But popular doesn't mean necessary or good. We'll survive without Facebook or YouTube.

How do you think it all plays out if everyone decides to block ads and not pay for content?

by kosei 9y ago

How do you think it all plays out if everyone decides to block ads and not pay for content?

The best content - done by passionate individuals for no monetary reasons - will stay. The good content will be kept afloat by donations. The usual corporate content will be written off as "marketing expense". The ad-supported worthless crap will disappear. The Internet would become leaner, but I can't see how it would not also become better.

lwansbrough 9y ago
> The best content - done by passionate individuals for no monetary reasons - will stay. That's assuming these people have other jobs (which will have to somehow be funded by something other than ads or selling data -- bye bye 90% of Silicon Valley.) Having other jobs means they won't be able to spend as much time on it and quality will suffer. > The good content will be kept afloat by donations. Donations often don't stretch beyond what's required to do the work that's been done before (people don't often donate once the donation goal has been reached.) This stifles growth. > The usual corporate content will be written off as "marketing expense". So companies that derive their value from the content they produce and sell ads on have to write off their entire business model as a "marketing expense". Good idea. Say goodbye to virtually all online publishing that isn't paywalled already. > The ad-supported worthless crap will disappear. You mean like Google, YouTube, Facebook, Spotify, Twitter...?
- dingaling 9y ago
  > You mean like Google, YouTube, Facebook, Spotify, Twitter...? Three of those provide paid-for tiers. The other two that do not, well...

beedogs 9y ago

In that situation? Optimally. It plays out optimally. If everyone suddenly installed and ran an aggressive ad-blocker, we could strangle all of the tracking networks overnight and the Internet would become a noticeably nicer place. People who refuse to concede that allowing ads is functionally the same thing as inviting third parties to monitor your browsing patterns and invade your privacy are being disingenuous.

lwansbrough 9y ago
Explain to me how some of the world's most popular services would operate without advertising revenue?
- fulafel 9y ago
  It's easy to see how "the Internet would become a noticeably nicer place" could be true while "some of the world's [previously] most popular services would operate" could be false at the same time.
- beagle3 9y ago
  That’s a cousin of the broken window fallacy, I am not sure it has a name, though. How would the horse merchants operate if everyone used cars? How would window fixers survive if there were no stones being thrown?
- beedogs 9y ago
  They might not be able to. But popular doesn't mean necessary or good. We'll survive without Facebook or YouTube.