4 ms·

You're right in saying that annoying ads are getting less common and that a minority of advertising networks have them now. I used to manually block such advert

by kbuck 13y ago

You're right in saying that annoying ads are getting less common and that a minority of advertising networks have them now. I used to manually block such advertisers myself, but I gave up and started using a filter list after spending several hours trying (unsuccessfully) to block YouTube video ads. I'd like to support the sites I visit, but the bottom line is that it's far easier to use a filter list than manually comb through the "blockable items" list in AdBlock when I discover yet another excessively annoying ad. I sometimes manually whitelist entire sites when I specifically want to support them, but frequently I don't even think about it (and when I do, I have to consider whether the ad network they're using is responsible enough to stop clients from posting ads containing Java exploits and whatnot). Using a filter list with AdBlock is one of the biggest improvements that an end-user can effect on their page load times and web browser responsiveness.

eli 13y ago
If enough people start thinking like that, we'll probably see a lot more "content marketing" like what BuzzFeed does. Ads that aren't really ads, but content that somehow promotes a particular advertiser or message. That doesn't work for everyone though and it has some obvious drawbacks. (Also, I'd argue that making Flash click-to-enable would have a bigger positive impact on load time. But unlike Adblock it might break some sites.)
- blumkvist 13y ago
  So you're saying that real marketing (a.k.a. psychologists crafting subliminal messages and injecting them into your brain without you knowing it) is better than banner ads?
malandrew 13y ago
The problem with whitelisting is that while I might trust the site I am browsing, I cannot trust the people the site might have outsourced its advertising to. If a site owner negotiates its own ad deals and serves them from their own domain, I will see them as will many other people. If you don't trust your third party ad providers enough to serve their content from your own domain, why should I trust them? I, and many others, simply don't have the time to determine which advertisers are trustworthy and which are not, and if I did, I do not have the time to follow up with each one to make sure they haven't sold out and become untrustworthy.

by kbuck 13y ago

eli 13y ago

If enough people start thinking like that, we'll probably see a lot more "content marketing" like what BuzzFeed does. Ads that aren't really ads, but content that somehow promotes a particular advertiser or message. That doesn't work for everyone though and it has some obvious drawbacks. (Also, I'd argue that making Flash click-to-enable would have a bigger positive impact on load time. But unlike Adblock it might break some sites.)

blumkvist 13y ago
So you're saying that real marketing (a.k.a. psychologists crafting subliminal messages and injecting them into your brain without you knowing it) is better than banner ads?

malandrew 13y ago

The problem with whitelisting is that while I might trust the site I am browsing, I cannot trust the people the site might have outsourced its advertising to. If a site owner negotiates its own ad deals and serves them from their own domain, I will see them as will many other people. If you don't trust your third party ad providers enough to serve their content from your own domain, why should I trust them? I, and many others, simply don't have the time to determine which advertisers are trustworthy and which are not, and if I did, I do not have the time to follow up with each one to make sure they haven't sold out and become untrustworthy.