Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Adblock. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Adblock. Show all posts

September 15, 2017

Ethically, is ad-blocking wrong?

  1. Boards
  2. Current Events
  3. Ethically, is ad-blocking wrong?
Vol2tex 1 day ago#1
Ethically, is ad-blocking wrong? - Results (111 votes)
Yes
4.5%
5
No
84.68%
94
Somewhat
10.81%
12
Realized yet another website shows this message now:

BKVn8ic
Asherlee10 1 day ago#2
Ethically? Not at this time because ad servicers and website owners are not vigilant in protecting the view from malware-infested ads. 

The company I work for has a large focus on digital advertising and I still use ad blockers.
"Opinions should be a result of a thought, not a substitute for it."
No, because ads often hide malware that try to install themselves into their system, and ad services are horrible at filtering these out.

Can't blame people for taking the precautions to protect themselves.
philsov 1 day ago#4
autoplaying videos with sound and redirecting popups are also ethically wrong. Ad blocking is the lesser evil. 

it's not a loss of revenue, because even without ad block I don't click on ads, unless the goal of the advertiser is simply an awareness campaign instead of seeking redirects.
Remember that I won't rest, 'til we share the same tense
Just know, to me, you're better late than never again.
Mike Xtreme 1 day ago#5
If the internet was free, maybe, but it's not so they get blocked
I don't like stuff that sucks
Yes, it's the only way many small sites can make revenue without having to charge for subscription or whatever. Certain sites like YouTube just don't deserve it though
.
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
Were_Wyrm  awake to mic1 day ago#7
My bandwidth, my choice.
I was a God, Valeria. I found it...beneath me. - Dr. Doom
http://i.imgur.com/9gYddqW.jpg
Gamer99z 1 day ago#8
Ethics got thrown out the window when even big name sites (including this one) allowed malware infested ads, extremely intrusive ads, and ads to shady non legitimate services, etc.
When it became a matter of protecting my PC and system ad block became a must.
"You need to lay off the peanut-butthurt and u-jelly sandwiches" - Neon Octopus
Vindris_SNH 1 day ago#9
No. f*** ads.
glitteringfairy: Just build the damn wall
ThyCorndog: and how exactly will that stop the mexican space program from orbital dropping illegal immigrants?
No, it's not wrong. When I want to read a news story, I don't need to see moving pictures of anime girls. Sure, I'll turn off my ad blocker and wait 10 minutes for my page to load, not respond, go super choppy, etc. 

This site used to have outright pornography. The people at the top see the dollar signs and don't even bother to check that a family friendly site shows full frontal nudity. Don't force your stuff on me.
"BEFORE we ask what is fair for illegal immigrants, we must also ask what is fair to American families, students, taxpayers, and jobseekers." D. Trump
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
No.
I came here for gamefaqs - not taboola, pagefair, indexww, agkn, sharethrough, google-analytics, qualtrix, demdex, criteo, scorecardresearch, or cbsi.

All adblocking really is, is denying access to or from an untrusted internet host.
kirbymuncher  ignores me1 day ago#12
If you installed a pc game and it came bundled with unrelated code of unknown origin and content that automatically ran outside of your control whenever you run the game.... that would basically be considered malicious / a virus

So why can ads do it?
THIS IS WHAT I HATE A BOUT EVREY WEBSITE!! THERES SO MUCH PEOPLE READING AND POSTING STUIPED STUFF
Nope, ads during media are a very petty way to generate revenue.
No. If ads didn't have malware, didn't have loud noises, or flashy animations, and didn't jump to the center of the screen, then maybe adblocking could be wrong.
The Official Odin of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board.
"You know how confusing the whole good-evil concept is for me."
I get where they are coming from, website ads can be a source of extra revenue.

That said, they completely f***ed the bridge of trust with full-screen overlays, auto-play/unskippable videos, questionable ad content, and other such bulls*** that does nothing but piss off the end users.
If they really wanted us to include their ads so bad, they wouldn't have given us such incentive to hide them.
Is it ethically wrong to change the channel on my TV when an ad plays?
Derp
there are no ethics in advertising, so I dont care about the ethics of blocking it
Billy Mays: July 20, 1958 - June 28, 2009
The Greatest
lilORANG 1 day ago#18
blablablax17 posted...
Is it ethically wrong to change the channel on my TV when an ad plays?

The difference there, is that Mt. Dew paid ahead of time. Web ads, in contrast, pay for every thousand times the ad actually loaded.

If TV ads (or billboards) ever somehow managed to be as intrusive and invasive as web ads, there'd be riots and lawsuits.
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
No. Ads piss me off to the extent that I will avoid that product. Companies are more likely to get my business if I don't see their ads.
"If the day does not require an AK, it is good." The Great Warrior Poet, Ice Cube
One reason why I like Linus Tech Tips and Howard Stern is because they set aside a few seconds to advertise a product themselves. So no possibility for malware scripts. That's the ethical way to do it.
lilORANG 1 day ago#22
DifferentialEquation posted...
No. Ads piss me off to the extent that I will avoid that product. Companies are more likely to get my business if I don't see their ads.

Also this. I'm more likely to support you when you publicly announce you won't support Breitbart.
Asherlee10 1 day ago#23
This also forces advertisers (like me) to be creative in advertising. Native advertising online is where it's at.

Reddit has one of my favorite methods. Ads appear as submitted posts, but are marked as advertising.
"Opinions should be a result of a thought, not a substitute for it."
It depends on how much you value the website you're on getting money from your click there.

That said, I find a lot of tricks they use with ads to be outright unethical, so that goes both ways. Ads with fake close buttons that just bring you to the site, ads that play music or force open to block the whole screen, or ads that bring you to malware infested s*** holes. Ad makers can do a lot of shady s***.

I would say if you really trust the site, and want them to make a small amount on your visit, add that website as an exception. Otherwise, f*** em.
Hey Trashcan Man! What did old lady Semple say when you burned her pension check?
Boston Bruins - 2011 Stanley Cup Champs!
lilORANG 1 day ago#25
have advertisers ever actually tried to sue adblockers for "stealing" or something?
Irony 1 day ago#26
No
I am Mogar, God of Irony and The Devourer of Topics.
http://i.imgtc.com/tHc3mIo.png http://i.imgtc.com/PYxw8Lm.png
josifrees 1 day ago#27
It's about as unethical as changing the channel when commercials come on tv
<|={D
I will say though, if I could be GUARANTEED that ALL ads would be non-intrusive and free of malware I would personally stop using adblock. I dont want to strip websites of ad revenue but I'm not letting some s***ty 3rd party fill my experience with s*** so you can make a couple cents off my views.
Billy Mays: July 20, 1958 - June 28, 2009
The Greatest
It's far more ethical than websites that serve ads that are either obtrusive (play sounds, videos, change size spontaneously, or pop over content) or deliver malicious payloads.
Hmm...
LinksLiege 1 day ago#30
I'd be more inclined to support content creators I like via alternate means.

That's just good business practice anyway - all your eggs in one basket = bad news
This is LinksLiege's signature. It is fantastic.
If we ever have to stop using an adblocker here I'm posting screen caps of every porn ad I get on the Pokémon boards.
~A little nonsense, now and then, is relished by the wisest men ~
TWSSted since~ 3/27/12 https://i.imgur.com/zlaENmx.png
halomonkey1_3_5 posted...
I will say though, if I could be GUARANTEED that ALL ads would be non-intrusive and free of malware I would personally stop using adblock.

If a site hosts a jpeg itself, and codes the hyperlink right into the html, adblockers won't block it.
That just, you know, takes a hell of a lot more effort than a magic-money-button javascript snippet, and requires finding advertisers who will pay upfront instead of milking "non-identifiable" profiles across countless other sites.
Asherlee10 1 day ago#33
Trigg3rH4ppy posted...
If we ever have to stop using an adblocker here I'm posting screen caps of every porn ad I get on the Pokémon boards.


You must look at a lot of porn. The ads are based on your web surfing.
"Opinions should be a result of a thought, not a substitute for it."
PokemonHunter69 posted...
One reason why I like Linus Tech Tips and Howard Stern is because they set aside a few seconds to advertise a product themselves. So no possibility for malware scripts. That's the ethical way to do it.


LTT is basically a channel of commercials. And dropping expensive equipment.
The_Juice_ 1 day ago#35
I have a limited amount of mobile data so I'm not trying to waste it on advertisements
Difference in men & women: http://i.imgur.com/kHCwK2p.jpg
Broncos l Raptors l Dodgers l Maple Leafs l UCLA
ChromaticAngel posted...
PokemonHunter69 posted...
One reason why I like Linus Tech Tips and Howard Stern is because they set aside a few seconds to advertise a product themselves. So no possibility for malware scripts. That's the ethical way to do it.


LTT is basically a channel of commercials. And dropping expensive equipment.


I love LTT
It's informative, and I like the dumb s*** they do.
Derp
AlephZero 1 day ago#37
Nope. The web is a request medium. I request a web page, the server chooses to send it to me, and I choose what gets displayed and executed on the computer I own. Nobody is forcing them to send me anything, they can deny my request if they want to.
"There is value in segregation." - qwertyman2002
01001100 01010101 01000101 00100000 00110100 00110000 00110010
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
Robin_Dude 1 day ago#38
Gamer99z posted...
Ethics got thrown out the window when even big name sites (including this one) allowed malware infested ads, extremely intrusive ads, and ads to shady non legitimate services, etc.
When it became a matter of protecting my PC and system ad block became a must.
http://i.imgur.com/gnTKIOz.jpg Thanks ILikeFatGuys
--- https://i.imgtc.com/Nj3aiHiSeG.png Thanks Yaridovich
adblocking will become unethical when ads have become ethical
C_Pain 1 day ago#40
theres no such thing as objective ethics
The main reason why i even USE adblocking is the way youtube does ads..

Thats just... not the right way imo.

And the standard 5 seconds before video isnt even the worst ones... no thats the videos where you get such an ad EVERY THREE MINUTES or so...
L.J.Gibbs: Rule 51:
"Sometimes You're Wrong."
Tmk 1 day ago#42
The whole concept of ads is just bizarre.

Like, if you could imagine yourself stepping out of all knowledge you have about the way the world works, and were being introduced to it piece by piece.

Someone explaining ads would have to go, "Ah, see, this TV program, is entertainment. It's made by people trying to make something to watch, that other people enjoy...and it's regularly interrupted by several minutes of things no one wants to see. So that they get money"


And that's just TV. Ads on like, billboards or whatever are more benign in comparison, but on the flip side, internet ads are regularly war more malicious and invasive.


To use the internet, you gotta pay for some sort of device, whether it be a phone or a computer, then you gotta pay to actually be connected to the internet, and then it's f***ing riddled with ads, with various sites going "hey pay us money and they'll go away"


I'm not sure that's a sustainable future for generating income for folks on the internet.
I am snazzier, hot, hot rant. Warily slight as.
Croak rush, OK? Weirder, almighty make out. ::)
Asherlee10 posted...
Trigg3rH4ppy posted...
If we ever have to stop using an adblocker here I'm posting screen caps of every porn ad I get on the Pokémon boards.


You must look at a lot of porn. The ads are based on your web surfing.

I really don't even get porn ads I was just being edgy. I would get ads for suboxone because I used to be addicted to pain pills and I was googling stuff about withdrawal techniques a lot. They seem like they've calmed down though because I've been clean from that s*** for a few years now so I don't really do much research unless I'm volunteering at the clinic.
~A little nonsense, now and then, is relished by the wisest men ~
TWSSted since~ 3/27/12 https://i.imgur.com/zlaENmx.png
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
pojr 1 day ago#44
No

We have the right to not see what we don't want to see

Especially with the danger of malware and annoying ads that should not exist

But it can be unethical if you're watching your favorite content creator and you're not supporting them at all
pojr
I summon it. You spell it.
luigi13579 1 day ago#45
No.

The most convincing argument for me is that you should not be forced to receive certain data on your own computer and connection that you've paid for, especially when that data can be (and often is) malicious and especially when it eats up your bandwidth (several Megabytes worth on some sites).

Now, if it leads to creators not being able to support themselves and having to charge money up front (or do something else we might not like), then you can't really complain (as much). That's the risk you / we take.

Basically, consumers are free to do what they want (within reason), but that naturally applies to creators also.
If the system in which ads is put up in the first place was nice looking and not intrusive, I wouldn't block.

However, they basically are as obnoxious as possible and ruin the experience of that website often. No thanks
It's art! YOU DON'T NEED PANTS! - Chris Jericho
http://imgur.com/a/1zdpk
Not in the slightest.
- The Admiral
#48
(message deleted)
Vol2tex 7 hours ago#49
f*** ads. They are infuriating.
Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/
  1. Boards
  2. Current Events 
  3. Ethically, is ad-blocking wrong?