The Verge: The internet is dying a slow death because of ad blockers
- Thread starter Wreav
- Start date
- Status
Firstly, way less trash articles and focus on good content. Less 3rd party scripts and meaningless ads, not removing ads entirely. They won't do this because it's too hard, they want it all, don't give a crap about quality.
McHuj
Member
Do people actually (willingly) click on ads? I really wonder what the rate is and not counting those that accidentally click?
The only times when I click on an ad is when I'm actively searching a product. That's the time I'm willing to entertain competitors or alternatives. When I'm looking at website, I'm there for that content and not a distraction.
Also if they want to deliver megs of ads on mobile, they should pickup the tab for my bandwidth.
The only times when I click on an ad is when I'm actively searching a product. That's the time I'm willing to entertain competitors or alternatives. When I'm looking at website, I'm there for that content and not a distraction.
Also if they want to deliver megs of ads on mobile, they should pickup the tab for my bandwidth.
Warm Machine
Member
I don't use an ad blocker on any of the 4 pieces of hardware I run. I've never seen the point and I'm not getting this full screen giant ad problem everyone else seems to.
Twitch ads on the ipad are, frankly, ludicrous, it offers you really good features to switch between streams but bam 1-3 minute ad when you do, which given that alot of games have natural downtimes, such as queue times for online games, switching between streams for small periods is a normal and natural thing to do. On PC I dont mind because I can have multiple tabs and streams open but damn they are milking the fuck out of the ipad.
PeskyToaster
Member
I've clicked on some ads on GAF but they are mostly game ones for games that I was going to buy anyway but the ad reminded me. So I guess it's working and I am a slave to corporations.
I don't get people saying the content creators did this to themselves. I realize that the person writing this article might be one of the bad ones, but opening up adblockers doesn't hurt just them. If Apple blocked certain types of ads on their platform because they were terrible, that'd be one thing. Instead Apple's going scorched earth on all ads that, conveniently, don't fit their own revenue model. As some others have pointed out, this hurts a lot of the small publishers. The Verge will be ok. They'll make an app or some shit and get cozy with Apple's new model. What about those just starting up? The barrier to entry is now much much higher.
When you open up things like this, the amount of people that will really fine tune and whitelist sites just to be a good person is miniscule. They'll block everything.
When you open up things like this, the amount of people that will really fine tune and whitelist sites just to be a good person is miniscule. They'll block everything.
Mammoth Jones
Member
People didn't use ad blockers because they refuse to see any ad ever. People have utilized ad blockers because ad companies and their vendors have gone absolutely batshit with the amount of extremely intrusive and interrupting ads.
From banner ads that redirect the user to the app store on mobile to interstitials that load 30 seconds after you've begun browsing and kills the page. Or ads that continue to reopen when you try to close them.
Ad blockers are a reaction to how damaging they've been to the users Web experience. They have only themselves to blame. And I'm very familiar with the fact that ads pay the bills. I totally get that.
But the ads need to respect the user experience and now users are taking the solution into their hands because the ad industry had no interest in doing so.
From banner ads that redirect the user to the app store on mobile to interstitials that load 30 seconds after you've begun browsing and kills the page. Or ads that continue to reopen when you try to close them.
Ad blockers are a reaction to how damaging they've been to the users Web experience. They have only themselves to blame. And I'm very familiar with the fact that ads pay the bills. I totally get that.
But the ads need to respect the user experience and now users are taking the solution into their hands because the ad industry had no interest in doing so.
A lot of pages crawl even with a fast connection. The gains of 21st century network infrastructure are squandered because of heavy ad traffic/crap JS/plugin CPU throttling. I used to read articles over 56K faster than I can get to an article on a site like Slate in the year 2015.
Industry benchmarks put the average click through rates of standard banners at less than 0.2%. That's right: point two percent. That's including accidental clicks.
Video advertising, pre-roll, has an industry average of 2.5-3%.
Of course, it all differs based on website and industry.
The reason you're starting to see so many editors write about ad blockers is because they never really see the CTR's. I'm sure some do, but the only thing they have any control over and the only thing they can see dropping are pageviews. So when they're forced to answer to why they're making less revenue, the answer is always adblockers because they see their impressions going down. They're not wrong, but they're also not always factoring the fact that the asking price for ads has dropped significantly over the past few years.
BolognaSoup
Member
Good. Will force them to find a less annoying/insulting revenue stream.
Prophet Steve
Member
I always feel a bit conflicted on the use of adblockers. I don't use one myself, although I'm very tempted to do so.
It seems the solution websites use against adblockers is to give non-adblockers even more intrusive ads, which is terrible.
Now websites do need a way to earn money. It can't be by ads apparently, because users seem to think it is completely fine to block the ads while consuming the content and raising costs.
So, use an alternative people say. Now, people seem to really hate it when you sell their information, and it does not really seem like a solution for more websites.
Well, one solution would be a subscription or some form of payment. Trouble is, if you are the one implementing this while your competitors still use ads. Chances are a huge amount of people are going to your competitors.
Giving users the option to either pay or see ads seems like an okay compromise for me though. However, how many people really are going to pay when they could just enable an adblocker and get the content for free?
No, I'm not saying that everybody would act like this, I'm sure there are many people here that would pay, however I'm also sure that many people would not. At the moment the public puts all the responsibility on the websites while still consuming the content.
It seems the solution websites use against adblockers is to give non-adblockers even more intrusive ads, which is terrible.
Now websites do need a way to earn money. It can't be by ads apparently, because users seem to think it is completely fine to block the ads while consuming the content and raising costs.
So, use an alternative people say. Now, people seem to really hate it when you sell their information, and it does not really seem like a solution for more websites.
Well, one solution would be a subscription or some form of payment. Trouble is, if you are the one implementing this while your competitors still use ads. Chances are a huge amount of people are going to your competitors.
Giving users the option to either pay or see ads seems like an okay compromise for me though. However, how many people really are going to pay when they could just enable an adblocker and get the content for free?
No, I'm not saying that everybody would act like this, I'm sure there are many people here that would pay, however I'm also sure that many people would not. At the moment the public puts all the responsibility on the websites while still consuming the content.
Bubba_Sparks
Member
I feel like the reason we have ad block is because people were fed up the invasive nature that ad's had achieved. Obviously content creators feel it has given then end user too much power, but what can they do when the end user can already control so much from the browser.
Glass Shark
Banned
I'm not going to go through a rigamarole and claim this is some righteous quest for privacy or that I'm concerned about malware. I block ads because I don't want to see them, and because it's easy not to. Some publishers will adapt and some will die. That's a price I'm willing to pay.
As someone who runs their own marketing agency I can completely see how this is an issue. Some sites require the funds from ads to fund their business. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with well targeted good quality ads.
The problem however is crappy ads which have created a bad name for ads in general. Autoplaying videos, 30 second video ads (Youtube seriously, every ad should be skippable after a few seconds, if I'm interested I'll watch it, if you force me to then I'll mute it and go on another tab for 30 seconds), huge full screen pop-up ads, and generally irritating forms of advertising which have the complete opposite effect.
The problem however is crappy ads which have created a bad name for ads in general. Autoplaying videos, 30 second video ads (Youtube seriously, every ad should be skippable after a few seconds, if I'm interested I'll watch it, if you force me to then I'll mute it and go on another tab for 30 seconds), huge full screen pop-up ads, and generally irritating forms of advertising which have the complete opposite effect.
Your Entertainer
Member
And the reason they block everything is because of how terrible average Internet ads are. No one would give a shit - me included - if ads were nonobtrusive, didn't hog bandwidth. I wouldn't use ad blockers. But when they significantly slow your browsing experience, take up vast data, and sometimes a majority of your time/attention during your visit to said site, it's too much, and they deserve to be blocked. Advertisers will and should figure out different, better ways to make money.
You may or may not have seen Nilay's latest defense of the awful, awful ads that The Verge employs in his Welcome to Hell article.
The crux of his issue with ad blockers is that ads are generating the lion's share of operating cashflow for content creators throughout the web. This conversation is happening this week because of Apple supporting ad-blocking via extensions in their latest version of iOS.
However, he totally glosses over the fact that advertising-only models are vanishing in different forms of media, like streaming music, video, phone apps, and time shifted tv.
The web, strangely, seems to be the last bastion of ad-only revenue reliance.
What do you think? Is the internet dying because of ad-blockers? Is it time for content creators to shake up their revenue models?
Also, this fucking guy...smh...
I'd say the internet is dying because you left Android for Apple but that's another topic.
As for 'The Verge' or any other media outlet (including NeoGAF) I think there is something to be said about ads and how they are used. NeoGAF for example requires revenue to stay in operation. I post on NeoGAF therefore I support this model. Are there ways EvilLore and the crew could do other forums of advertising? Sure. Namely, (and I'm thankful they don't) reselling our information to 3rd parties. Making us watch pop up video ads, click thru links to just get to a thread akin to Forbes or NYT; Any number of these could be used. So why aren't they? Simple. Culture.
The internet is made up of a diverse cultures that transcend a human approach (ironically) to how we ingest content / media. If you look at YouTube for example, embedded ads as "road blocks" to content ensure that advertisers that have paid "X dollars" get "X exposure" at the going rate that Google has prescribed. Again, Apple in their latest iOS 9 version are stripping content away from the websites (including Ads) however, make no mistake that they are also pimping their News platform that will have its own ad revenue the same. To me, Apple is using a bait and switch tactic given that if the News experience is "better" than the mobile web experience, you keep people in your ecosystem.
Google's the same way, so is Microsoft. However, on that large a scale, the "one to many" strategy of the golden days of advertising (imo) is dead. We all have collectively signed up for the bandwagon of 'Minority Report' like ads that are tailored to our tastes, wants and desires. Hell, I'm sure most of you have gotten an e-mail from Amazon in the past day say "Get the latest Blu-Rays today!" or some variance of that given your browsing habits.
The internet is still in the teenage years and slowly crawling into their mid-20's. Growth like this is normal. The next "Zuckerberg" if you will be figuring out how to make ads as common place as web content.
Warm Machine
Member
Would anyone here pay a small subscription fee for a site with good quality and substantial coverage or has that ship long since sailed?
So you don't have a problem with the fact that Malware can be gotten through those ad networks because the ad networks don't vouch every ad?
NoScript + Adblock = safest way of securing your PC from the most common malware vector currently.
Pay walls for content are just clinging to the old model habits which by this rate, are not sustainable for long term growth of any site.
Completely agree. Much rather support a site through ads if they're properly targeted and well created.
I pay for Baseball Prospectus, Giant Bomb and WSJ.com so yeah.
Warm Machine
Member
Ok. What is the appropriate monetization? Have ad providers buy ad spots?
I contribute to several patreons for content creators that I enjoy.
entremet
Member
It's tech site. Google is your friend, buddy.
MWS Natural
Member
I stopped using ad blocker once I started my own website and realized how much it fucks content creators over.
I pay for Giantbomb dot com!
Mammoth Jones
Member
Seriously. I mean when I monitor my Web traffic on my iphone there are many many times more ad calls than the Web calls that simply lot the page and its content.
I really liked his magazine and television examples. Intrusive advertising has long been the reason why I don't consume either type of media, and why I carry the remote around with me while watching live sports (instant muting).
Thank god for ad-block, and thank god for people discovering new ways to monetise media and moving away from the advertising model. Pay for a music subscription? Sure! Music is awesome, and worth it. Pay for my online newspaper? Sure! Good journalism is worth it. Support wikipedia? Sure! It's an invaluable resource.
But watch ads? Sorry, no interest in it. Give valuable content or a valuable service and give me a way to pay.
EDIT: A lot of people are saying if the ads weren't terrible they wouldn't block them. I'm afraid I'm not that way. It's the idea of them I hate.
Thank god for ad-block, and thank god for people discovering new ways to monetise media and moving away from the advertising model. Pay for a music subscription? Sure! Music is awesome, and worth it. Pay for my online newspaper? Sure! Good journalism is worth it. Support wikipedia? Sure! It's an invaluable resource.
But watch ads? Sorry, no interest in it. Give valuable content or a valuable service and give me a way to pay.
EDIT: A lot of people are saying if the ads weren't terrible they wouldn't block them. I'm afraid I'm not that way. It's the idea of them I hate.
Giant Bomb premium member represent
entremet
Member
Those full page pop ups on iOS are the worse.
It's possible, but I would 10000% prefer ads.
UncleSporky
Member
Wait, so he doesn't provide an ounce of research that demonstrates that sites are dying and disappearing due to losing ad revenue?
Where is this death?
Would anyone miss these sites where the owners say "thanks to ad blockers, we have unfortunately had to shut down due to lack of revenue?" If people cared about the sites like people care about GAF, they would whitelist the site to support them.
What's the y.o.y. percentage decrease in ad revenue online right now?
Where is this death?
Would anyone miss these sites where the owners say "thanks to ad blockers, we have unfortunately had to shut down due to lack of revenue?" If people cared about the sites like people care about GAF, they would whitelist the site to support them.
What's the y.o.y. percentage decrease in ad revenue online right now?
Agree.
On occasion, when I am not using ad blocker; I sometime do follow an ad that interest me and may *gasp* buy from them. Advertisers need to learn the line between being mildly interesting, and being annoyingly intrusive.
Piston Hyundai
Member
Not a mobile user, huh?
The problem as I understand it is, the subscription model is really only a viable option for bigger sites.
diffusionx
Gold Member
I'm amazed at how much better my phone operates with Peace or Crystal turned on. Pages load much faster and they stay in memory much longer.
I'm not against ads. I resisted using an ad blocker for years on PC. But guess what, sites like The Verge took advantage of me. They loaded up their site with so much junk to the point where 90% of a page is ad. It kills my battery, eats up all my phone's memory, and takes up lots of my capped bandwidth.
I pay for NY Times. I'll pay for other sites too. I don't mind it. I'll whitelist sites that aren't intrusive (like ArsTechnica) but for the rest, figure it out. DVRs came out a long time ago and people still watch TV.
I'm not against ads. I resisted using an ad blocker for years on PC. But guess what, sites like The Verge took advantage of me. They loaded up their site with so much junk to the point where 90% of a page is ad. It kills my battery, eats up all my phone's memory, and takes up lots of my capped bandwidth.
I pay for NY Times. I'll pay for other sites too. I don't mind it. I'll whitelist sites that aren't intrusive (like ArsTechnica) but for the rest, figure it out. DVRs came out a long time ago and people still watch TV.
Seductivpancakes
Member
photobucket has those auto play video ads and they are very irritating.
AtomicShroom
Member
It needs to be said again and again:
The problem is not with advertising itself. The problem is with how advertising has been perverted to a Frankenstein-esque monster of unsupervised, obnixious, deceitful, malicious, and flat-out illegal ads that somehow need to connect to 50 different domains to be served.
The internet needs to gather itself and establish a strict standard where sites meeting this standard are given an access on adblocker's whitelists.
This standard would be granted to a website when it meets a certain set of rules. These rules should include such stuff as:
- No popups.
- No deceitful ads.
- No sound.
- Every ad run on the network needs to be validated and confirmed free of drive-by malicious software, viruses, exploits, etc.
- Must not increase the website's load time/data fetch by x%.
- etc.
If the internet can gather and establish standards such as HTML5, why can't it do the same for advertising? The internet as we know it is going to die if there is nobody mandating advertising guidelines. It's a complete fucking far-west where the shadiest of scumbag scammers are one-upping themselves to come up with ways to invade your machines for money. It's disgusting.
The problem is not with advertising itself. The problem is with how advertising has been perverted to a Frankenstein-esque monster of unsupervised, obnixious, deceitful, malicious, and flat-out illegal ads that somehow need to connect to 50 different domains to be served.
The internet needs to gather itself and establish a strict standard where sites meeting this standard are given an access on adblocker's whitelists.
This standard would be granted to a website when it meets a certain set of rules. These rules should include such stuff as:
- No popups.
- No deceitful ads.
- No sound.
- Every ad run on the network needs to be validated and confirmed free of drive-by malicious software, viruses, exploits, etc.
- Must not increase the website's load time/data fetch by x%.
- etc.
If the internet can gather and establish standards such as HTML5, why can't it do the same for advertising? The internet as we know it is going to die if there is nobody mandating advertising guidelines. It's a complete fucking far-west where the shadiest of scumbag scammers are one-upping themselves to come up with ways to invade your machines for money. It's disgusting.
- Status