Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why Do You Block Ads?

Posted by Cliff on from the because-they-are-annoying dept.

flyingember asks: "With ad blocking becoming ever more popular among users, why do you block ads? And with what? Do you view internet ads as different from say, TV ads? What about in a magazine? Do you not buy a magazine because it has too many? I'm specifically talking about the ads in a webpage, but even popup blockers can cause problems with me using a site."

34 of 1,470 comments (clear)

  1. My reasons by powerpuffgirls · · Score: 5, Informative

    1. Most ads are taking too long to download. Even if I have broadband, I would rather use it on somewhere useful.

    2. Most ads are too big and intrusive.

    3. Most ads are irrelevant.

    See the trend? That explains why Googld Ads is so successful.

    1. Re:My reasons by Pizpump · · Score: 2, Informative

      Screw Google's Adsense also. Ads are ads, targetted or not. Personally, I add any ad server's address I come across to my local "hosts" file (Windows XP). Since my machine believes that address is local, I get no ad.

    2. Re:My reasons by jZnat · · Score: 3, Informative

      Which is also why it's not uncommon to be able to get a free magazine subscription. As far as I remember, publishers get their money in proportion to how many subscriptions they sell, so the more the better, even if they have to give away many of those subscriptions for free in order to attract new subscribers.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    3. Re:My reasons by MikeFM · · Score: 4, Informative

      As both a developer that uses ads on many of his websites and a user that blocks ads I guess I feel both sides of the issue.

      I didn't use ads for years because I felt they were to intrusive. Why did I decide to start using them? Mainly because ad blocking software was finally easily enough available and easy enough to use that I felt that being intrusive and adding download time didn't matter as much because users have the power to turn the ads off. Sometimes I even offer a button on my sites that will disbale ads for the user. The secondary reason is because users have told me time and again that they'd rather see ads than be charged a fee (even less than a dollar). Often I offer both as options. Paying members don't see ads and get more features but the basics are paid for by ads. For a long time I ran my websites completely from donations but in recent years (since about the time of the 911 attack) users have stopped donating. I've not been able to pinpoint the why but it seemed a very strong trend despite my sites continuing to grow. Loss of donations has forced me to use ads and charge for membership as loath as I am to use those methods. Oddly enough I've also noticed the more useful a website the less the ads get clicked. This seems a bad trend to me as it encourages websites of crap instead of making good information easily available. Two of my websites.. one gets about 500 unique visitors a day and contains solid Linux information.. the other gets about 100 visitors a day and is down right now and contains nothing but a notice that it'll be back up after I finish recoding it. The first site usually gets no clicks while the later gets about five per day. The same trend seems to hold among my other sites. Sort of encourages the building of dead-end or confussing websites.

      I've tried a couple different ad programs. So far I like Yahoo's better than Google's because it doesn't load quite as slow and the ads pay better per click. On the other hand Yahoo does a poor job of rotating ads but I suspect this is due to their beta status.

      Given that I make a living from ads why do I block them? Because they are freaking annoying. I don't read junk mail, spam email, watch tv, or read magazines that insert ads throughout the content. For myself I'd rather make donations to websites I like than pay for memberships or see ads. I'd be more willing to do memberships if they didn't overprice them. Usually I charge about $5/mo for my sites which is pretty reasonable. A site that charges more than that or that makes signing up painful I just won't use. Ads I'd use more if they weren't so often annoying to look at and inserted in inappropiate spots in the content. My perfered type of ad to see is a small paid sponsorship (~80x30 pixels) at the bottom of the menu or page. If I see such an ad I'll more often click on it especially if it looks well made (flashy but tasteful) and related to the site content.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    4. Re:My reasons by KylePflug · · Score: 2, Informative

      Adblock is a much more effective means to the same end.

    5. Re:My reasons by NeuroKoan · · Score: 2, Informative

      Very true.

      Most magazines and newspapers could be given away for free, but they charge a nominal fee to create a percieved value. It is strange, but that free paper is for some reason less desirable then the one that costs 50 cents. If it is free, then the opinions and articles inside must be of a lower intellectual value.

      But, on the other hand, if papers and magazines charged their real cost + profit without ads, then no one would buy because the price would be too high.

      --

      "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation."
    6. Re:My reasons by negative3 · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://www.pierceive.com/ has a damn good filterset for Firefox adblock. I've hardly had a problem using it, and it is much easier to grab the new one than constantly adding sites to your own list (especially when you're too lazy to export it to another pc).

      --
      "Physics is to math what sex is to masturbation." - Richard Feynman
    7. Re:My reasons by X0563511 · · Score: 2, Informative

      There was a new "advertisement" on top of that one right there:

      Offensive Search Results
      We're disturbed about these results
      as well. Please read our note here.
      www.google.com/explanation

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    8. Re:My reasons by Proc6 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Hear, hear. Incidentally, that's (one reason) why I DO subscribe to Consumer Reports. No paid ads. Period.

      I hate to be the one to break this to you, but Consumer Reports is one giant paid ad. They consistantly rate Bose speakers as top quality audiophile products for Christ sakes.

      --

      I'm Rick James with mod points biatch!

    9. Re:My reasons by hedge_death_shootout · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hey - interesting story. I tried to find out about it and found this, which seems to confirm the existence of the ad, but contradict you on its successfulness:

      [snip]...A positive example of such an attitude was realised in the advertising campaign [for Pollena 2000] of 1990-1996 in the strategic use of quotations from a very famous canon trilogy by the nineteenth-century writer Henryk Sienkiewicz. [...] The high level of satisfaction was gained by virtue of reference to the common archive of quotations. The linguistic pun and the historical scenery imitating the novel's reality took the audience by storm. It was a great commercial success which some agencies tried to repeat[snip]

      This makes it sound like the ad worked and the crafty Poles got the reference.

    10. Re:My reasons by Bam359 · · Score: 2, Informative

      How about National Geographic?

    11. Re:My reasons by TimTheFoolMan · · Score: 2, Informative

      What most people don't realize is that their subscription does not pay for the magazine. The ads do.

      For a color magazine, the production costs are huge, even in large volumes. The subscription cost simply "qualifies" the reader. This is why magazine subscriptions are priced like airline seats: two subscribers who bought on the same day from a bingo card (one that fell out of the magazine) may get very different rates. The subscriber who pays more is deemed "more serious" about the subject, simply because they're more willing to shell out $$ for information on the subject. If the mag can prove to subscribers that they hit enough of those readers, then they can justify ads for more expensive products, and/or drive up the ad rates accordingly.

      The old Cobb Group publications of the 80's and early 90's (I was the Editor-in-Chief of some of the developer pubs) were all subscription driven, and people were massively annoyed that they only got 16 pages of content for $49/year. They were insistent that we didn't need to use ads, and could somehow bulk mail glossy, 75-page mags with no ads, and not charge $400/year. Even for 16-page 2-color publications, it typically cost $2 to get a copy in a subscriber's hand, and that's not counting marketing and overhead costs.

      As for my reasons for blocking ads, it's primarily because of a complete lack of relevance. On the other hand, I recognize that I tend to keep the publications from knowing too much about me, which no doubt affects their potential ability to present relevant ads to me.

      Tim

  2. Ehh by andreyw · · Score: 4, Informative

    Eyesore. Waste of screen real estate. Invasion of privacy.

  3. Sound by EvanED · · Score: 2, Informative

    FlashBlock with Firefox. I didn't used to block anything but popups, but when they started to use sound in ds, I was fed up.

  4. 56k by PhireN · · Score: 5, Informative

    I Block ads because they take too long to load on my 56k modem.

  5. Here you go by Kris_J · · Score: 2, Informative
    why do you block ads?
    They're visually annoying and distracting. They're a waste of bandwidth. Sometimes they're even noisy.
    And with what?
    A .hosts file, Firefox's built-in popup blocker, Adblock for Firefox, Flashblocker for Firefox and Proxomitron with the JD5000 ruleset.
    Do you view internet ads as different from say, TV ads?
    Nope. If I'm unfortunate enough to be watching a program live, I mute the ads. If I'm watching it later, I fast-forward.
    What about in a magazine? Do you not buy a magazine because it has too many?
    Yes. There are magazines I stopped buying because they became all ads and no content. The only magazine I currently subscribe to has no ads.
    I'm specifically talking about the ads in a webpage, but even popup blockers can cause problems with me using a site.
    If my ad-blocker causes problems with a site I decide if it's worth turning it off. If not, I move on and typically never come back to that site.
  6. Re:Magazine Ad Overload by mph · · Score: 3, Informative

    Or, maybe you want a magazine with no ads. Like Consumer Reports or Cook's Illustrated, both of which sell for a reasonable price.

  7. Why Do You Block Ads? by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Informative

    > why do you block ads?

    Because I find them irritating.

    > And with what?

    Privoxy.

    > Do you view internet ads as different from say, TV ads?

    Don't watch TV.

    > What about in a magazine? Do you not buy a magazine because it has
    > too many?

    Yes (but I very rarely buy magazines anyway).

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  8. You can stop them on TV... by spagetti_code · · Score: 2, Informative

    using MythTV. Strips them out automatically. Sadly misses the odd one, but I have 'skip30' and 'back5' buttons on my remote to solve that - 7 or 8 quick clicks past the ads, then back to the start of the prog.

    I haven't seen an ad in many months. TV has improved out of sight for me.

  9. Re:Magazine Ad Overload by John+Miles · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have this sinking feeling that it's already happened - you and I just haven't seen them yet.

    Surf through enough old paperbacks with copyright dates from the 1940s-1970s in a used bookstore, and you'll probably find some ads. Especially in book-club printings and other editions that were sold at a discount. I'm not sure exactly when this practice died out, or why, but it has definitely been done.

    --
    Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
  10. JunkBuster / Privoxy by molo · · Score: 2, Informative

    I block ads with JunkBuster, but plan on moving to Privoxy soon. JunkBuster is showing its age (only support HTTP 1.0, etc.). I find adverts distracting and a waste of bandwidth. I've also started downloading TV shows that interest me so that I can watch them without the ads. Cuts down on viewing time by 20% or more.. and the quality is better than over-the-air analog.

    -molo

    --
    Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
  11. Wrong country, that's why by Spacejock · · Score: 2, Informative

    1) I live in Australia and 90% of the sites I visit are flogging stuff to US-based internet users. I couldn't buy the stuff if I wanted to.
    2) Most ads are large, very colourful and very distracting.
    3) It's so easy to block them. Right-click the offending image, choose Adblock, shorten the url and stick a * on the end for a wildcard match.
    4) My first broadband account had a 500mb month cap and 15c/meg over that. If I did a lot of web browsing I could literally end up paying to view ads.
    5) When I'm in the market for a big-ticket item I read reviews and compare prices and features. No amount of advertising will influence my decision to purchase. If a manufacturer wants to influence me they need to make a product so good that it's a no-brainer. E.g. the Subaru WRX.
    6) I usually buy small ticket items on impulse. I'm there in the shop, it's staring at me, I buy it. Online ads for small ticket items are pointless. (Freight + waiting time)

    --
    Hal Spacejock: Science Fiction with Nuts
  12. www.pimpmysafari.com by pomo+monster · · Score: 2, Informative

    Then use a different adblocker, like SafariBlock.

  13. Re:annoying animations by roach2002 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Setting, in about:config, image.animation_mode to "once" will finish off the rest!

    Hope this helps

  14. Re:I don't block ads by vorpal22 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Many slashdotters think its really kewl to block ads, but ads pay for the sites you are viewing, ads pay for slashdot (not nearly enough of us subscribe to keep this site running).

    Slashdot, as well as every website I can think of that employs ad-based content could certainly find ways to cover costs and generate revenue without relying on ad-based income. LiveJournal, for instance, offers enough value-added content to subscribers that thousands and thousands of users happily pay; never has LiveJournal had to rely on ads. This is a business model which more online companies should seek to emulate.

  15. Re:I block and avoid as much as possible by st0rmshad0w · · Score: 2, Informative

    I use opera and use Mike's Ad-blocking Host File (goole it I'm lazy) to get rid of the majority of ads. Works pretty well.

  16. Dallas airport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The road through the Dallas airport used to have huge electronic departure/arrival boards until someone stopped to read them and was rear-ended. The airport was sued and lost a 100-million-dollar judgement. It might not happen in Canada, but perhaps Toronto is exposing itself to a large liability.

  17. Blocking ads by Dash16 · · Score: 1, Informative

    I block ads because they are animated, have sound/music, or otherwise take away from the web page I am trying to view. If there is a disruptive ad right in the middle of an article I am reading, especially an animated one (GIF, flash, you name it), I block that sucker immediately with Firefox's adblock. Advertisements that are irrelevant don't usually get immediately blocked by me, only if they are annoying. Again, ANYTHING animated or with sounds I did not chose to play get blacklisted, I'll go as far as to find the source of all the ads not just that single ad and wildcard block the whole ad directory on a server.

  18. Not true. by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 2, Informative
    For "Jew", yes. For "Jews", no, no message. And, that message is targetted at the hate sites that come up when you search for "Jew" (If you had looked at the results, and actually followed the link www.google.com/explanation, you would know this).

    However, if you Google for "JewS", there is no message, and there is indeed an eBay offering.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  19. Re:Invasion of privacy issue by MonoSynth · · Score: 2, Informative

    Those who view HTML-based e-mail have similar problems - any spam you open with a blank, embedded image link (provided you view images) will result in the spammer instantly obtaining vast amounts of data about you.

    The worse thing is that those 'images' are in fact just asp or php scripts (with binary output of a 1x1 transparent gif) that can be used for sending all sorts of information. 'http://spam.com/white.gif?id=34512' can give them as much information as replying to the spam.

    That's why you shouldn't load external images from e-mails you don't trust.

  20. Re:I think the better question is.. by Ugly+American · · Score: 2, Informative

    Because blocking ads takes effort.

    Using adblock and a hosts file requires practically no effort at all. There's even a filterset.g updater extension now, so all I have to do is check every once in a while for updates to the hosts file and right-click + "adblock image" on anything that filterset.g doesn't get.

    For that minimal investment of effort, I get improved page load times on my 28.8k connection and I no longer have to put up with the all-singing, all-dancing ads. It's well worth it.

    --
    For sale: one sig space, gently used. Inquire for details.
  21. Magazines without ads by Erich · · Score: 2, Informative

    Cook's Illustrated, my favorite magazine.

    --

    -- Erich

    Slashdot reader since 1997

  22. ad blocking via hosts file by computergeek1200 · · Score: 1, Informative

    The hosts file is good for ad blocking if you put the domain names of the advertising sites with the localhost IP and have netcat listen for connections from an IP other than local host with the capital "L" (nc -L -p 80 22.43.133.93) and then have a hosts file like this:

    127.0.0.1 pagead2.googlesyndication.com
    127.0.0.1 media.fastclick.net
    127.0.0.1 cdn1.tribalfusion.com
    127.0.0.1 cdn5.tribalfusion.com
    127.0.0.1 itxt.vibrantmedia.com
    127.0.0.1 geek.salary.com
    127.0.0.1 spe.atdmt.com
    127.0.0.1 a.tribalfusion.com
    127.0.0.1 images.webattack.com
    127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net
    127.0.0.1 altfarm.mediaplex.com
    127.0.0.1 a.as-us.falkag.net
    127.0.0.1 adlog.com.com
    127.0.0.1 www.layermedia.com
    127.0.0.1 global.msads.net
    127.0.0.1 ca.rd.yahoo.com
    127.0.0.1 us.a1.yimg.com
    127.0.0.1 us.i1.yimg.com
    127.0.0.1 assets.bravenet.com
    127.0.0.1 www.bravenetmedianetwork.com
    127.0.0.1 accipiter.speedera.net
    127.0.0.1 banner.oddcast.com
    127.0.0.1 view.atdmt.com
    127.0.0.1 content.yieldmanager.com
    127.0.0.1 ipods.freepay.com
    127.0.0.1 ad.yieldmanager.com
    127.0.0.1 adsfac.net
    127.0.0.1 cdn.mediaplex.com
    127.0.0.1 img-cdn.mediaplex.com
    127.0.0.1 adfarm.mediaplex.com
    127.0.0.1 links.industrybrains.com
    127.0.0.1 a248.e.akamai.net
    127.0.0.1 network.realmedia.com
    127.0.0.1 nx-adv.bookclubservices.ca
    127.0.0.1 www.burstnet.com
    127.0.0.1 servedby.advertising.com
    127.0.0.1 realbannerads.com
    127.0.0.1 srs.targetpoint.com

    More infomation on this system will be available on my site sometime in the future
    I will also release a beta version of a hosts file based ad blocking system
    http://s010600609736b3d7.cg.shawcable.net/tech

  23. Re:Vote with your wallet by stickyc · · Score: 2, Informative
    California's new law allowing Hybrid cars to drive in carpool lanes is not very good. Honda makes a hybrid Accord that pollutes more and gets worse fuel economy than several non-hybrid cars. GM is about to release a hybrid pickup truck that only gets 10% better fuel economy than a standard truck - 10% of 15MPG is only 1.5MPG more (partly because the hybrid setup is primarily designed to provide 120V AC power outlets throughout the truck for contractors). Imagine that owners of these hybrids get rewarded in CA by being allowed to drive in the carpool lane!

    FYI - There IS a fuel efficiency requirement for hybrid vehicles in California carpool lanes. As a result, only the Honda Civic Hybrid, the Honda Insight Hybrid, and the Toyota Prius Hybrid are actually eligible, and on top of that, there's only a limited number of permits available, so even some eligible vehicle owners will be left out.

    Here's the California DMV's chart on eligible vehicles (hybrid, electric and CNG): http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/carpool/carpool.htm