4 ms·
It is not the responsibility of Internet users to ensure the jobs of people in the advertising industry. Compelling users to view ads (when they view other cont
by commoner 5y ago
It is not the responsibility of Internet users to ensure the jobs of people in the advertising industry. Compelling users to view ads (when they view other content) to protect those jobs would be an infringement on individual rights for a very poor reason. That's why ad blockers and DVRs are legal in every country that I'm aware of.
- robomartin 5y agoSo, you think that the only people who's jobs are affected by this theft are those in the advertising industry? I have news for you. Those jobs are not affected at all. Advertising isn't going away, ever. The channels change, but advertising survives. There's plenty pre-internet history on that. The jobs that are affected are those from the sites that rely on ad income to pay for salaries and their costs. If 100% of internet users used ad-blocking millions of jobs would evaporate almost overnight. I'll give you a simple example of this. A good friend of mine runs a nice little site where he and his wife provide valuable and well-researched nutritional information for pet owners. They work very hard to create their content. This site is their sole income. This is what they do to house and feed their kids, to have a life. Nearly 100% of their income is form advertising on their site. If they did not generate this income they would go bankrupt and likely lose everything. Why do people like you think it is OK to steal their work product? I don't get it. How can anyone rationalize that. Once you get down to ground reality, it's theft.
- commoner 5y agoNo business is entitled to survive eternally on its existing business model. Businesses must adapt to changing market conditions if they want to succeed in the long term. And every business owner goes in with the understanding that success is not guaranteed. Hopefully, your friend is keeping track of the increasing popularity of ad blocking and developing alternative sources of revenue to supplement their display ads. Affiliate links, sponsored articles, subscriptions for premium content, merchandise, and donations are common monetization pathways for websites. Reading a website without loading or viewing the ads is not "stealing" or "theft", since the site owner voluntarily provided the content free of charge. If the site owner doesn't want people to read their content for free, they should charge for it. No viewer is obligated to load or consume all of the content provided in any medium, and a site owner has no inherent right to compel a visitor to spend time or attention on any part of the site.
- robomartin 5y ago> No business is entitled to survive eternally on its existing business model. Businesses must adapt to changing market conditions if they want to succeed in the long term. Typical totalitarian view coming from an artificially constructed moral high ground. Now you want to tell people how to create, finance and run a business. Most people who think this way have never run a non-trivial business in their lives and have no idea what it takes.
- commoner 5y agoNope, defending the right to block ads is a libertarian position because it affirms the autonomy of individual internet users. No individual is obligated to go out of their way to enrich another person's business or support the viability of someone else's business model. Please don't make assumptions about my personal life, you have no idea who I am.