4 ms·

I had my experience with this in 2006 or 2007. I was younger then and I was served a malicious ad on a video game website. This ad was only showing for 1 in eve

by MRD85 8y ago

I had my experience with this in 2006 or 2007. I was younger then and I was served a malicious ad on a video game website. This ad was only showing for 1 in every 1000 or so users, which made it quite difficult to detect back then. Ever since then I've run an adblocker and/or scriptblocker. I'm constantly asked by websites to drop my ad blocker but why would I do that? If they want to serve ads than maybe there is a way they can do it themselves, as opposed to a third party serving them.

iaabtpbtpnn 8y ago
Of course there is a way they can do that, because that's how it always used to work. It's just not as cheap or easy.
jnbiche 8y ago
> If they want to serve ads than maybe there is a way they can do it themselves, as opposed to a third party serving them Indeed there is a way. And if they do it the old-fashioned way, using static ad assets, then the ads aren't typically blocked by ad blockers, anyway (at least not automatically). Furthermore, these kinds of embedded, static ads lead to more honest, authentic relationships between content providers, advertisers, and viewers.
- Jernik 8y ago
  unfortunately for content producers, this kind of advertising is typically more work and less profit
- fatboy 8y ago
  From what I’ve been told by the web team at the company I work at, images get blocked by ad blockers if they match the industry-standard advert sizes for banners etc. We serve our own ads that we sell directly to businesses related to our content, but it’s often done through the customer’s PR agency, who sort out the ads for various different outlets, and are not interested in making different sizes that wouldn’t be blocked just for us.
  - romwell 8y ago
    >PR agency are not interested in making sizes that wouldn’t be blocked Sounds like the PR agency is interested in making ads which nobody would see. Great job, PR agency.

by MRD85 8y ago

iaabtpbtpnn 8y ago

Of course there is a way they can do that, because that's how it always used to work. It's just not as cheap or easy.

jnbiche 8y ago

> If they want to serve ads than maybe there is a way they can do it themselves, as opposed to a third party serving them Indeed there is a way. And if they do it the old-fashioned way, using static ad assets, then the ads aren't typically blocked by ad blockers, anyway (at least not automatically). Furthermore, these kinds of embedded, static ads lead to more honest, authentic relationships between content providers, advertisers, and viewers.

Jernik 8y ago
unfortunately for content producers, this kind of advertising is typically more work and less profit
fatboy 8y ago
From what I’ve been told by the web team at the company I work at, images get blocked by ad blockers if they match the industry-standard advert sizes for banners etc. We serve our own ads that we sell directly to businesses related to our content, but it’s often done through the customer’s PR agency, who sort out the ads for various different outlets, and are not interested in making different sizes that wouldn’t be blocked just for us.
- romwell 8y ago
  >PR agency are not interested in making sizes that wouldn’t be blocked Sounds like the PR agency is interested in making ads which nobody would see. Great job, PR agency.