Lousy ads are ruining the online experience

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by maflynn, Jan 18, 2017.

  1. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #1
    From recode, a facinating article about how bad ads are.
    Lousy ads are ruining the online experience
    This paragraph struck me, because sites like cnet and bleacherreport.com has little videos that autoplay in the lower right hand corner. I've largely stopped going to those sites because of those services.

     
  2. Beachguy macrumors 6502a

    Beachguy

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    #2
    Those that have the videos you mention really tick me off. That's why I have some of the blocking I have, and will continue to find ways to stop them. I HATE autoplay video. It's like the companies that won't let you in if you have ad blockers. I don't turn mine off. I just figure your site is not worth it. Had sites not abused viewers in the first place, we wouldn't be this way.
     
  3. mobilehaathi macrumors G3

    mobilehaathi

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Anthropocene
    #3
    Nice to see people are paying attention to a real problem. I thought this paragraph was quite interesting, too, highlighting the shift in dynamics which is driving the issue.

     
  4. maflynn thread starter Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #4
    What software do you use because so far adguard isn't doing what I want with those videos.

    That was surprising and it drives the point where they were scrambling for the dimes at the expense of the dollars, or to put it another way penny wise but pound foolish. Now they're in a predicament where are less willing to click or put with the commercials.

    I've seen long commercials on a video (beyond 30 seconds) and I finally gave up because the video wasn't worth my putting up with sitting there seeing that add for so long
     
  5. mobilehaathi macrumors G3

    mobilehaathi

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Anthropocene
    #5
    Heh, oh yeah, definitely been there done that! It's awfully obnoxious.
     
  6. Beachguy macrumors 6502a

    Beachguy

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    #6
    I have an HTML5 blocker, i use a HOSTS file, ABP, and a few I am trying to catch those that still make it through. Occasionally, one makes its way through.
     
  7. Tech198 macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Australia, Perth
    #7
    +1 ... That's the most annoying.. If i wanna play, I'll hit play, but everytime i go to these sites i gotta hit "Don't play" or pause.. I don't mind the ads since i use uBlock Origin and block by dynamic filtering (advanced) (firefox addon)

    https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering:-quick-guide

    I find this takes care of most of it.
     
  8. MacUser2525 macrumors 68000

    MacUser2525

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #8
    What are these ad things you speak of, seriously people in this day and age still allow that junk to be displayed on their computer. Well the last part was retorical as well when I go to work on peoples machines it just boggles the mind the usually at least half dozen tool bars taking up most of the browser space, ad tracker installed malware up the wazoo, viruses and other assorted foolishness. By the time I am done with the machine they will never see any of it again unless they are total moron in which case I thank them for their repeat businnes.
     
  9. Tech198 macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Australia, Perth
    #9
    Ads are displayed that's just how it is.. If no ads are displayed then that means u'r running software or extensions, which blocks it, or a companies IT corporation does on behalf of everyone in a company.
     
  10. MacGizmo macrumors 65816

    MacGizmo

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Location:
    Arizona
    #10
    I've tried running almost all the blockers out there. In the end, every one of them proved to be more trouble than they're worth for me. If I have to go through and white-list things, add specific rules for things that do get through, and have obnoxious pop-ups telling what it blocked, then it's just as bad or worse than the ads (speaking for the user experience and visual appearance of the site).

    There is no solution to this problem, because people simply aren't going to pay for things that have been free forever, no matter how worth it the site is. Once you take that option off the table, we're always going to end up with sub-par solutions like the current ad-tracking, in-your-face-constantly ad model.
     
  11. Pakaku macrumors 68000

    Pakaku

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    #11
    I'm still satisfied with NoScript and Firefox, even if it takes some manual setup. But most of the stuff I block ends up being stuff multiple sites use, so it's not the worst thing.
     
  12. ApfelKuchen macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2012
    Location:
    Between the coasts
    #12
    It's a completely predictable outcome. The democratization of the media (anyone can publish) means far more "media" outlets competing for ads. As a site need only sign up and paste code into their layouts in order to participate in ad networks, even the least business savvy sites are able to play.

    The pie remains more or less the same, everyone gets smaller pieces (lower rates, often driven by auction-based advertising networks). Only the most influential outlets have the leverage to influence advertiser behavior/presentation. Even those influential outlets are faced with the temptation to place additional ads (and usually succumb) - if they're pulling large numbers of eyeballs despite the ad clutter, why de-clutter?

    Subscriptions are a partial answer, but "free" advertising-supported media will always be part of the competitive mix - there are practical limits to how much anyone can or will pay out of pocket - they aren't going to subscribe to every site they visit. And a substantial portion of users are going to choose "free" over paying even a penny - "How dare they charge me, information wants to be free!!!!"

    The best we can hope from subscriptions is that they give the reader/viewer a voice at the table. A publisher less dependent on advertising for survival has greater leverage with advertisers - if they can afford to place fewer advertising slots on their pages, the value of the remaining slots ought to go up (but only if they sell directly to advertisers - network-driven ad rates may not budge an inch).

    If subscription revenue can be part of the auction mix (subscribers bidding against advertisers for ad-free/reduced-ad environments), there's some hope for change. It might take Google to make this happen - who else has the clout to tell the advertisers, "This is just the way it's going to be."

    Advertising-free media will always be a fraction of the media pie - our appetites always exceed our means, both as consumers, and as producers. If sites can deliver more/better content by accepting money from both subscribers and advertisers, compromises will be made. If popular contributors can bid-up their pay... ditto.

    It occurs to me that the subscription model needs a mechanism that competes with the auction-based advertising networks - automatic distribution of subscription revenue based on the subscribers usage/behavior. One of the biggest tricks would be to establish linkage - short of totally ad-free (which seems impractical in most cases) how does the subscriber know that he/she is receiving a reduced payload of ads?
     

Share This Page