Will Mainstream Media Embrace Adblockers?

Blarkon writes "Slashdotters are aware of and often use Adblock Plus," and notes that "if newspapers wanted to hit the online content industry hard right now, they would be running non-stop information about how to obtain and use Adblock Plus.' That a scorched-earth approach to blocking Internet advertising through AdBlock Plus might collapse free online competitors by starving them of revenue. If more people are aware of Adblock plus, it will be more tempting for other browser manufacturers to include similar ad blocking functionality. Might Rupert Murdoch's apparent 'traffic killing' move to paywall content be a desperate gamble to avoid the impact of a future crash in the ad-supported online business model caused by everyone's browser including something like Adblock Plus?"

Comments

No problem. So what's the alternative?

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Users have shown that they will not pay for online content unless there is an actual value-add. News sites provide nothing that can't be eventually seen on TV or read elsewhere.

Newspapers are done. Trumpeting AdBlock isn't going to help them make a cent.

Re:No problem. So what's the alternative?

[BrokenHalo]

Remember, this is the vision according to Rupert Murdoch. He's an old man, he doesn't own all the media, and he has a 20th-century vision of those that are left. So even if he did somehow have any sway over the others, the old "bums-on-seats" model of advertising just won't hold water any more.

If he doesn't realise now that the "pay-per-seat" model for news content won't attract customers, he'll realise it later. If he misses his boat, there'll be tears before bedtime.

Brought to you by the Mixed-Metaphors-Department. No charge.

Please don't

[Necreia]

If/Once Ad-Block becomes mainstream, companies will further and further integrate advertisements into the content. A good example is to look at how YouTube has ads baked into the flash.

News and other ad-supported information sites would take steps such as inserting an ad jingle or statement in the middle of a paragraph.

Not getting revenue anyways.

[Darkness404]

In general, the people who have an up-to-date browser and have an ad-blocker don't click on ads. And in general most ads are paid per click rather than per impression, meaning that they are losing no money when someone has ad-block plus installed because they wouldn't have clicked on the ads.

But pay-fer sites will want ads too

[wherrera]

Look at paid cable service channels. Almost all those channels have ads. So would the paid news sites, I expect.

First rule

[CopaceticOpus]

We should stop talking about ad blockers. If a majority of people start blocking ads, then a majority of websites will start finding ways around them.

The first rule of ad blockers is the same as the first rule of that other thing.

ad blocking could have been entirely avoided...

[SCHecklerX]

...had advertisers not become so obnoxious. There is no going back. They did this to themselves.

How sites can embrace the AdBlock model

[David Gerard]

Do you mind non-obnoxious ads from sites you actually like? Me neither, they're just fine.

What to do:

1. Make your ads not a goddamn pain in the arse.

2. Gently ask adblock-using readers to add your site to their whitelist. DON'T MAKE THIS A POPUP, THAT'S DOING IT WRONG.

I'll stop blocking ads...

[jeffb (2.718)]

...when you stop trying to hijack my autonomic nervous system by building ads that writhe, squirm and strobe insistently in my peripheral vision. That is, when they aren't flinging gobs of DHTML poop right on top of the content that I'm actually trying to read.

I choose not to block ads

[slim]

I feel that I have an unwritten contract with content providers: you provide me with content I want, and in exchange I'll tolerate the ads. That's the quid-pro-quo, and I'm very happy with it. It's better than paying money.

If the ads are so intrusive that they're intolerable, I'll go elsewhere. Effectively, I "can't afford" that content.

I reckon using an ad blocker is *directly* equivalent to circumventing a micropayment mechanism.

Re:I choose not to block ads

[CodeBuster]

I feel that I have an unwritten contract with content providers

The whole concept of "unwritten contract" is a ploy by the powerful, who honor no such "contracts", and the masses whom they wish to control. Why observe an "unwritten contract" when you could act selfishly and gain without being exposed? The real world plays hardball so why fight with one arm behind your back?

Re:so stop using ad blockers

[Narishma]

I'm sorry but 2 or 3 animated flash ads are not unobtrusive. They make the page load slowly and take huge resources to run all the flash player instances. Some websites bring low performance machines (like netbooks) to a halt if you don't use adblock.

Paid content == more expensive ads.

[slim]

One thing people miss is that paid content often contains ads, and advertisers are likely to pay more for those ads.

The logic is, if you're paying for content, then you must be really engaged with it. Say I charge 10c to visit my page about SCUBA diving. I can tell advertisers - look, I don't get as many visits as those free SCUBA sites, but I can demonstrate that every visitor is (a) really into SCUBA and (b) prepared to spend money.

That's the kind of eyeballs an advertiser wants to reach. In theory, they'll pay more to advertise on such a site than they would on a competing free page.

This is actually the reason print magazines and newspapers charge a cover price. The marginal cost of printing and distributing them is negligible. But showing advertisers that the readership is commited, that's priceless.