3 ms·

I assumed my intent would be clear, but if you insist on nitpicking: The BBC could mention it's possible to block ads on the browser version of Instagram, with

• rchaud 7y ago
  Because it's the BBC, they have certain editorial responsibilities. It's one thing if they started a content series around digital rights, where adblocking extensions could be discussed. But this is a standard issue news story, so it's not appropriate to editorialize. Look on the linked page for links to external sites. Beyond the Twitter embeds and cancerous Taboola/Outbrain advert links, there are none. For regular news stories, the BBC will rarely link out to non-BBC URLs unless it's to link the original investigation run by a different organization.
  • deogeo 7y ago
    How is mentioning the existence of ad-blockers, on a story about ads, editorializing? Meanwhile teaching you how to be a good consumer and set your ad preferences is 'neutral'?
    • rchaud 7y ago
      From your original comment: > they could teach how to install uBlock Origin, instead of how to help corporate when their spying fails. That's quite a bit different from "mentioning the existence of", which would be reasonable IMO. In any case, the elephant in the room that's gone unmentioned so far, is that the BBC introduced Google Ads on the site a few years ago, so it's probably not a priority for them to explain to users how they can block ads.