Why Do You Block Ads? 1470
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."
Mostly for sport (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't recall having this aversion to advertising before popups got huge, so I think the advertisers just pushed me enough that I said "you know what? fuck you guys, I'm not going to see a single damn one of your bullshit ads."
Re:My reasons (Score:4, Interesting)
Annoyance factor (Score:3, Interesting)
Animated crap and poorly designed pages that make the ad-links (ohh, and that damned javascript highlight words BS) get insta-adblock.
Sure, that policy has led to my adblock filter catching damn near all graphical ads -- that ain't my fault.
I still see Google's.
Computer Shopper (Score:4, Interesting)
Then it went to $2.95 an issue and consisted of 2/3 ads.
Then it went to $3.98 an issue and consisted of 3/4 ads, but dropped down to only about 200 pages.
At that point I never bought another copy.
(Yes, the numbers aren't exact, but it makes my point.)
Right now, I only block popups, though I'm considering blocking far more. I used to block all of doubleclick's stuff, but they aren't as common as they once were.
Do you not buy a magazine because it has too many? (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't mind some advertising, but the amount and intrusiveness of modern advertising is obnoxious enough that I do avoid buying magazines and I have had to take the time to figure out adblock and flashblock.
Why I Block (Score:3, Interesting)
If it is intrusive. I cannot stand within text ads. Never EVER put an ad in the middle of a paragraph. EVER. If you do, I won't look at it, and I'll block it if I can. So does my mother, the demographic the ad is targeted for. Any ad that takes over (pop-over).
All other ads, I respect. The advertisers must make money, and I do click on ads I find interesting. I feel it is important to support those who support things I like.
Pointless and useless (Score:5, Interesting)
The vast majority of ads on the internet are either completely disinteresting to me - trying to sell me a server appliance, or telephone deals in another country. Or they are advertising online casinos that I would never visit. Or they are scams - you know, the "Your computer is not OPTIMIZED click HERE" crap. If interet advertising was actually relevant to my every day needs, and didn't all come across as a cheap scam, then I might be more tolerant.
In fact, I am. I'm quite happy to view the Google ad-words ads, because they have, sometimes, shown me something I might be interested in.
Re:Computer Shopper (Score:5, Interesting)
Adblock with Filterset.G (Score:4, Interesting)
What ads do I see? None, or very close to it.
What legitimate content gets blocked? None, or very close to it.
Why? Having IFRAMEs dissapear makes the page shorter. Less to download. Less crap in my way. And nothing is safe either (including Google textads). If I don't like something the definition does, I just change it.
Re:Magazine Ad Overload (Score:2, Interesting)
If not the printed books we have now, then possibly the eBooks of the future.
Re:annoying animations (Score:2, Interesting)
I block pop-ups (somewhat), but nothing else (Score:2, Interesting)
Additionally, I am very happy to pay a couple of bucks a month to sites like Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/ [salon.com] to have a streamlined and ad-free experience (in the case of Salon, I also want to support strong independent journalism).
I'll tell you what worries me, though: people (or, worse yet, applications by default) blocking text ads. IMHO that's pretty self-defeating long-term; if text ads cease to be significantly more effective than graphical and/or annoying pop-up ads, then companies will either revert back to more flashy ads (yuck!) or they'll start putting content behind subscription walls (bad for searching, bad for wallets), or -- worse yet -- may just decide to stop sharing or creating content at all.
Re:Firefox + Adblock + Adblock Filterset.G Updater (Score:3, Interesting)
Multiple reasons w/explantions (Score:2, Interesting)
2) Ads typically are poorly placed. It will takes away from the content your reading. Do you go to a site to see ads or to view something else. Its mostly likely that you are their for something else. A non-obtrusive ad servers its purpose better than one that is obnoxios. Its like a car sales man from the 60's doing their hard sell tatics. Guess what; these are the 2000s(?); the hard sell attituded has died off in most other business, except the web.
3) The ads do not reflect the reason you came to a site. Yes, I am reading an article about Sun servers but for somereason I get an ad about this x10 camera. How about being relevent and target the market for that page. Perhaps something like a Sun ad or an HP-UX ad? Noooo, that would make sense...
Does anyone realize why Googles ads are sucessful? They target a market. Search by mini-itx and you get ads about people selling mini-itx. Guess what? I am going to click on those ads!!! They are not flashing/blinking; they are not obnoxious and they are freakin relevant. Gee.... I think that this could be a pattern for sucess.
Hard sales with irrelevant subjects are a disaster; no matter on how hard you try to sell your product, its not going to work. The reset of the sales people or at least the good ones do the consultative selling approache.
Final note; because this is
Ever go to a car dealer and have them try to sell you a suit case or a dust buster? I think not; web advertisers have to get a clue. This also goes along with popups. Doing something creative to bypass the ad blocking software/popup blocker is not going to get you a sale; it will get you negative feeling about the product and the company selling the product (to most users) and perhaps at one point some people will realize that its also the marketing company; this applies to Joe Sixpack user.
Re:Computer Shopper (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Computer Shopper (Score:5, Interesting)
[picks random edition of eWeek off the stack of unread IT rags] Even in this relatively content-heavy magazine, 26 of 58 pages are ads.
Occasionally, ads are a magazine's primary desirable content, such as ComputerUser -- *most* of why I have a subscription is because I need to see local vendors' component prices. I've even been known to complain when there aren't enough ads.
Almost all dog and horse magazines are essentially ad venues, with only token content. BUT -- there again, the main reason people buy these mags is to see ads relevant to their breed(s) of interest.
Here's the Big Point: when the ads are relevant to the audience's needs and interests, then ads are desirable -- and may even be regarded AS the "main content".
But on the web, we're typically bombarded with ads we did not choose to see, that are of no interest to us, that waste our time and bandwidth, and that *interfere* with viewing the "main content".
Small wonder that just about everyone who groks ad blocking proceeds to do so.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Magazine Ad Overload (Score:3, Interesting)
Just my experience, but I do voice my opinion when a company disappoints me.
Re:Computer Shopper (Score:3, Interesting)
Different than TV/magazines (Score:2, Interesting)
Case in point: I am currently looking into getting a Vespa. My car was crushed in Hurricane Rita, and I have a 5-block commute that's just long enough in the hot Texas sun to eliminate human-powered locomotion. I've never seen a Vespa commercial. But if I watch the commercials tonight on television, I have no chance of hearing of it or of alternative bike brands. Instead, I will be inundated with 15 minutes of advertising for big Texas trucks, Viagra, diapers, feminine hygeine products, and television shows I don't watch. Give me 3 minutes per hour of targeted, privacy-protected advertising and I'll be all ears. Give it to me on BitTorrent in HD and I'll even pinky-swear that I won't skip the ads or take my copyright-infringing potty break.
On the web, I do not block Google-like advertising, or even graphic banner ads. I block Flash because of their secret non-cookie-cookies and other abuses. Magazine advertising does not magically follow you from one page to the next, making noises and throwing itself on top of the article print. It does not force me to fill out a form with my personal information before I can turn the page, and it does not send messages back to the mothership. If it did any of these things, I would forego buying magazines (or, alternatively, switch away from whatever brand of brownies might have accompanied the experience).
I am not opposed to advertising. Well-done, it answers a consumer need. Even poorly-done, it is a necessary evil until open-source, distributed P2P applications can take over many services (search, publishing, hosting, communication, etc.) that are currently centralized out of technological necessity and commercialized out of market necessity. Once a year, I even put my ReplayTV in the undocumented "Superbowl mode" so I can watch all of the burping frogs and sock puppets without the pesky football getting in the way of my party.
But advertising is not about eyeballs: it is about gaining the *respect* of the consumer, not simply their *attention*. Respect my privacy, respect my space, respect my computer, respect my bandwidth, and I might give you the Internet equivalent of an elevator pitch. Fail on these counts, and it doesn't matter whether I find a way to block you or not, I won't be purchasing your dancing monkeys or secret cameras or casino games.
Burned long ago, never to trust again (Score:4, Interesting)
It all started with animation. There is nothing worse than trying read some articles with dayglo green-on-pink spinning, flashing, !CLICK HERE! on top. I can't... think... with that there! Junkbuster fixed that.
Then there was cookie management. I only log into a handful of sites, why does every single one need cookies to the end of time? JB again to the rescue: it could convert cookies into session-only cookies, and leave the ones I need alone.
Then came the spam. Back then I was using Netscape 4, and it would dutifully load remote images off the web, with no way to stop it. Privoxy helped there by letting me blackmail IPs. Not great, but better than nothing.
Since it's a proxy, all this worked for the times I was also forced to use IE, which I tried to resist as long as possible. Since neither Netscape or IE had any of these features, it was a great add-on.
As everyone around here has said over and over, text ads don't bug me. I could go militant anti-ad and start filtering text ads with Privoxy, but I don't. Google got it right. God bless 'em.
These days, things have changed for the better. Mail clients can disable remote image loading, and actually prefer text over the HTML bullshit. Browsers have per-site cookie management and allow you to accept session cookies silently. Firefox has ad-block.
"Maybe ads aren't so bad anymore", I think, "maybe advertisers have learned their lesson, and I should stop blocking". Then I use my parents' computer without adblock on a Christmas break. The ads now are movies, overlay the entire screen, with swooshing rock soundtracks. Result: adblock not only stays on, but gets installed on permanently on their computer too. And anyone else's I work on.
At home, I picked up a ReplayTV 5040 (the geek PVR) -- two babies made following "24" impossible, and I was tired of swapping tapes. I dumped the stupid VCR the day we got it. Automatically skipping ads was just a pleasant bonus, and saves lots of time.
I don't block ads (Score:5, Interesting)
My eyes gravitate towards whatever article/information I'm reading and completely ignores the peripheral ads. Once in a while, I see something that I like, and if I do, I click on it.
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).
On the other hand, we do have the right to block ads, its our computer and bandwidth. But if enough of us do, then most of the sites we know and love will cease to operate. As someone working in the ad-serving and tracking industry, ad blockers (not popup blockers -- popups are evil) are beginning to show up as a serious chunk in the stats. Advertisers and their agencies are now up in arms. Not being able to tell the ROI of an ad, means agencies can't tell if its worth showing or now.
By us not clicking on the crappy flash ads -- that sends a message. Blocking it does not.
Re:My reasons (Score:1, Interesting)
My solution is simple: I use both the onboard sound AND a PCI card. The music/games are manually instructed to use the better card, everything else goes to the onboard. If I don't want to hear garbage, I just mute the onboard. Easy!
Still, I wish there were a global "mute" for browser-based stuff. Just a little clicky button on the toolbar, that tells embedded MIDI and Flash to shut the hell up.
Simpler reason: The overcame my inertia. (Score:5, Interesting)
This is apparently a very complex social issue as very few people seem to regonize that this treshhold exists. Certainly not those in power, it explains why our "leaders" are so often confused when we suddenly rebel against something we have quitely accepted before.
It happens in all sorts of places in our society, from important to trivial, the resistance against immigrants (muslims mostly) that "suddenly" came to a rise in europe. Has politicians totally baffled. The young male "suddenly" no longer watching tv (and more important tv commercials) has tv bosses claiming the world is coming to an end.
What has simply happened that a constant level of annoyance has grown to the point where people are no longer just content to let it lie.
When that "okay" radio starts cranking out ad-blocks of more then 5 minutes it perhaps becomes rewarding enough to simply switch the radio off and take the effort to bring in your own music. When that tv program you sorta watch is interrupted beyond the point where you can actually remember what you where watching then perhaps you don't switch back (is there any human out there who can watch a full dutch tv ad-block?). Perhaps you don't switch the tv on at all when all you ever watch are half of a tv-show.
So I block ads EVERYWHERE because they have grown to irritating. They reached my treshhold where I go from simply being irritated to taking action.
And just as the current backlash against muslims in europe went from tolerance to hatred in a flash I am now very extreme in my ad blocking. ALL image ads are blocked and screw even those sides where I can fully understand they need ad income to survive.
My current solution is getting a bit old but for now the ads that do slip through are not yet irritating enough to make me spend an hour or two finding a better solution and implementing it. When it does my browser will once again be totally ad free and many a free site will loose yet another tiny slice of income.
Then again who cares about sites like those game sites with bloody redirects to full page ads? Or slashdot with it showing a linux user MS ads? Geez talk about adding insult to injury.
Will I ever go back to unblocking ads? Perhaps. Someday I will buy a new computer and install a clean version of my OS on it and then I will probably be to lazy to install an ad blocker immidiatly (then again the blocker is part of squid so this is only when I replace my "server") and if I find that the ads then are not irritating enough I may not bother.
Lets face it, that is not very likely eh?
The response by marketing to the increasing resistance against ads is to make the ads bigger and more intrusive.
Re:My reasons (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:My reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
This is a little bit off-topic, but relevant insofar as getting site owners to change broken content is concerned.
A little while ago, my Mum was having trouble convincing one of our older family members to eat properly. I had recently stumbled across a new type of food in the supermarket that my cats really enjoyed, and so I thought that the old cat might enjoy it too...
So in the course of an email exchange with Mum (I'm Australian, that's how we spell 'Mom'), I figured I'd send her a link to the specific type of cat food I was suggesting...
Well, I couldn't. As it turned out, the company had a web site that was all Macromedia Flash and bells and whistles and glory, and the only way I could point my Mum at the particular product I was talking about would be to say "go to this site, now click on the 'bleh' link followed by the 'foo' link, then scroll down to 'bar'...."... Or I could just not reccomend the product.
As it happened, that was the week I was lecturing my Bachelor of Business students on making sure that money you invest in IT actually benefits the business, don't let the IT department run away with cool toys that don't deliver value to customers, etc, etc (I'm a geek, but somehow I've managed to convince someone to let me lecture business students!!!) and I so I got a bee in my bonnet about it and I emailed the cat food company...
Basically I said look, your web design company sold you on flash because it is pretty and bling bling and looks lovely, but here's a concrete example of how going with flash made your web site sufficiently unuseable that it cost you a sale. I couldn't effectively reccomend your product to my quasi-computer-literate Mum 'cos she would have issues navigating the web site, and I couldn't send her a direct link.
Lo and behold, a month later, the cat food company [dine.com.au] had a new web site, all standard html with proper workable links that change in the address bar as you work through the site, and now I can send a link to my Mum (and I have).
What's more, the web site loads faster as well!!!
.
.
.
.
(As an interesting aside, slashdot seems to have recently updated it's code. I had to turn off all of my adblocking stuff to make the posting page appear as anything but a black background - it's been like that for about a month now (Firefox, The Proxomitron))
Re:My reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
The ones that seem to have memory leaks are a pain on computers of any age. Now why is firefox using 80MB+ of ram? That's right, it's those damn flash ads. I use firefox with flashblock and set to block popups because I don't like having any more windows open and some used to open in another window, the other window you were working on something in. Flash ads get boring after a couple loops.
Re:because they are annoying (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:I don't. (Score:2, Interesting)
Err... no, they weren't.
Sure, the television executives put them *on the air* to trick people into watching commercials, but behind the shows themselves were people who actually cared about creating quality entertainment. To equate all television to the level of "just there to sell you stuff" is to cheapen the artistic vision of people like Gene Rodenberry, J. Michael Strascynski, and Joss Whedon to the level of the garbage sitcoms and reality shows that litter the rest of the television airwaves. And, unless you're going to say that an episode of B5 or Farscape is no better than an episode of... er... whatever crappy reality shows are on the major networks right now (I haven't even owned a TV in almost two years), then your argument is highly subjective at best.
Re:if not ads, who should pay for content? (Score:2, Interesting)
BBH
Re:My reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
I dislike all advertising and solicitations (Score:3, Interesting)
I block ads for 3 reasons
1. I dislike clutter and junk. I visit a webpage for the content. Not the crap floating around trying to sell me something.
2. Spyware relief. This was a bigger issue when I was using IE, but I noticed all my spyware was coming from these banner ads. They either tried to install some ActiveX or exploited some hole to install it without asking. for example on my Father's compter. Every month he would have 30 new spyware apps installed. Once I install this hosts file, I see one or none installed.
3. I rarly is never buy anything because of an ad. If I want something I will go out and get it. I guess ads are only good for one thing... telling me of something that I never new existed. That might be fine for some closed off old grandma but I am pretty much in the know.
I also dislike Spam for obvious reasons, but hate junk mail and phone calls. I either throw junk mail on the floor in the post office or save it and return it in the pre paid envelopes. Since the post office got paid to give me the junk I figure they can pay someone to throw it in the trash. On TV I have TiVo so I can skip threw the commercials in a few seconds. No TiVo in the bedroom and we scream becasue our eyes bleed from the crappy commercials. I also do not answer my door. Anyone who knows me knows to call first. Evry time I opened the door when it was not expected it was someone selling or pushing something. They get the door slammed in their face.
Idiots block ads. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:My reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Invasion of privacy issue (Score:2, Interesting)
They can keep track of all the pages (with their ads on) you have been and all different ads you have seen and clicked on, and deduce your personality, your habbits, your interests and the kinds of niches you are into.
That's called invasion of privacy.
So I usually surf in w3m.
Re:My reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
Not to add a "me too", but a MythTV install really does change the value of TV. If you don't have it, you don't know what you're missing. Get a cheap $50 TV card, setup MythTV, and have it record everything you would even consider watching throughout the week. Then instead of wasting time watching whatever crap happens to be on at that hour, you always have TV shows around that you would want to watch, which you can pause whenever you want. Typical storage is around 1.3 gigs per hour, which is cheaper than videotape, and much less clumsy.
This also means you can take advantage of reruns of an entire series. Often a series is rerun in order during the daytime, but unless you're unemployed and watch TV all day, you don't have time to watch them all in order. With DVR, you can record them and watch them in order, and follow along with the arching plots.
Auto-skip of commercials is just a bonus.
Re:My reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
These "You're a Winner" pieces of crap suck ass because 1) they are lying to you and 2) they are served up by companies who obviously aren't paying lots of attention to their ethics and often show up on webites I would like to trust; too bad their ads are lying to me.
Lying to a potential customer to try and make 2 cents is remarkable insulting to the reader.
I simply want YOUR marketing mesage OUT of my face.
Re:My reasons (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Computer Shopper (Score:4, Interesting)
He was being a bit optimistic, perhaps, but he's basically summarized the way things stand, or that they seem to be heading. And this was first printed in the original UK issue of Wired magazine, so that was what, a decade ago? The whole essay, What have we got to lose? [douglasadams.com], is fascinating stuff. Go read it if you haven't come across it before -- you'll be glad you did.
Re:My reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Flashing: if an Ad flashes or wibbles or wobbles it distracts my eye from being able to read the text on the page, which defeats the purpose of the page and the advertising - I find these ones actually painful and headache inducing.
2) Garish Colours: If an Ad is overly bright relative to the surrounding text/sytle (ie: pages with white text, black background) it can make it overly hard to focus on the text.
3) Sound: There is absolutly no reason that an Ad should have or play sound. Hell there is no reason for an Ad to be flash - often times the volume is set too loud and it affects my usage of the computer.
4) Pop-ups: Its my browser, my PC dont run around making windows on it!
5) Spyware/Deceptive ads: I block advertising that is deliberatly misleading because that content should not be advertisable - the advertisers who allow people to peddle their scumware via that method should be shot along with their clients.
I specifically allow google and other text based ads, as they are usually more relevant and seem to fit in with the flow of a well designed site better. They get read more than the other crap. I'm sure most of the clicking of the flashing, wobbling ads is out of people trying to get them to sit still or shut the hell up.
M
Re:My reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
When communism collapsed in Poland and we got our first ads, washing powder named "Pollena 2000" was marketed using a reference to one of Polish best known book. The TV ad they used is still quoted as the best Polish ad ever -- and yet, it caused a decline in sales. Why? The bulk of the audience is nearly mindless, they don't read any books and even if they happen to remember something they were forced to read in school, it brings traumatic memories.
No ads here (Score:2, Interesting)
I also no longer buy magazines due to the advertising:actual content ratio being all screwed up.<p>
I also no longer listen to the radio because of excess advertising (and the proliferation of entertainment marketed as 'music' though thats another discussion entirely)<p>
But hey, thats just me. I'm aware of the alledged justification for advertising and all that jazz. I'm just being honest with myself when I say outright that advertising pisses me off no end, irrespective of medium.
Re:Here in MN it's possible to block ads in yards. (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, it should be easy to circumvent:
Say you want to put up a sign "Get Firefox!", then instead make a sign which says:
[small]I demand my political right to put up a sign saying[/small]
[big]Get Firefox![/big]
[small]in my own front yard![/small]
This is clearly a political sign, and therefore shouldn't be a problem.
Re:I wish... (Score:3, Interesting)
Brilliant! (Score:3, Interesting)
Recently I did some research and I found that about 20-30% of people don't have Flash installed. Further, as you've pointed out, over 50% of people cannot use Flash correctly to navigate a page [useit.com]. This means if you're a company, roughly two-thirds of your audience are not seeing your content. That makes no business sense whatsoever.
If Flash sites weren't (usually) garishly designed, searchable, easy to print, and had text that you could select and copy, then maybe I wouldn't be so against it.
Many reasons (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't view them to be any different from TV, billboard, magazing, newspaper, or any other ads.
I don't buy any magazines other than the C/C++ User's Journal, and even that is starting to suck. All of your "popular" magazines are so crammed full of ads, it's just disgusting. One magazine my wife brought home was geared so heavily towards advertising that they put the Table of Contents on several pages, and the first one didn't start until page 20! You had to flip through all the ads to get to the Table of Contents, and then flip through more to continue reading it... and without the Table of Contents, trying to find what you were looking for was impossible given the number of pages that were just plain ads to begin with!
I watch my TV shows by downloading them off the net, commercial free.
I block all Web Ads.
I download music and movies instead of buying them (although more and more movies are simply advertisements with a bit of story around them), mainly because it's the laziest civil disobedience I can muster. Why is it illegal to download music and movies but it is perfectly legal to stage a systematic, heavily researched, concentrated attack on my brain, manipulating me, making me stupider and poorer with no way to get around it? I would have to stop watching TV, Movies, reading papers, opening my eyes while walking along the street, listening to the radio, talking to friends or anyone else that speaks english, etc... you can't get away from it. How on earth is that legal?
The above post appears to be a simple rant. And that's what it is.
Re:My reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:My reasons - We pay for data downloaded in UK (Score:1, Interesting)
It was the ads that move over the text of the page just long enough after it having loaded for you to be reading it that cause me to install adblock. Now I've started blocking ads, I find it just makes the web a much nicer place.
The counter example - Google's ads are actually often useful and I quite frequently follow them as well as the search results. We're decorating at the moment, so companies offering the bits we need are just what we're after.
Because I can (Score:1, Interesting)
It's my computer, I pay (when at home) for the connection, and when I want to buy something, I'll go looking for it.
Before you ask, I don't have cable TV, don't watch broadcast TV (except for Yu-Gi-Oh with my son, and then I turn the sound off on ads), load DVDs with the monitor off and don't turn it on until past the advertising the effing film industry tries to force down my throat, and when I listen to commercial radio, it's generally to symphonies or operas where there's long stretches of music and little advertising.
Junk mail gets either returned to sender or thrown directly into the recycling bins unread, I make use of both federal (because the fines are bigger) and state (because they pay me a bounty) do-not-call lists, and don't wear clothing with manufacturer's brands on them (except for my windbreaker with the 6-color apple with the dent in it).
Yes. (Score:2, Interesting)
I block ads because they are intrusive and interfere with my ability to read or enjoy websites.
And with what?
Firefox's popup blocker, and the almighty hosts file.
Do you view internet ads as different from say, TV ads?
I skip those, too, when I can, on things I have recorded on DVR. I used to see them as opportunities to use the restroom or grab a snack, but now I have a pause button. Often pausing to use the restroom or grab a drink enables me to skip some ads in the future. My time is controlled by me, and not by the television. This is a Good Thing.
What about in a magazine? Do you not buy a magazine because it has too many?
Yes. In fact, I've stopped reading magazines for the most part. 90% of the information they contain can be obtained through websites a month before that. And for the 10% that's "exclusive", it becomes accessible before the page even hits the stands, usually. If not almost immediately after.
As far as I'm concerned, it's a dead medium. I do read the newspaper occasionally.
Animated Ads (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't know whether it's the fault of nvidia, xorg, linux, fedora (e.g. it's fine on windows), gecko or firefox, but I do know that it is very annoying and is the only reason I went to the trouble of installing an adblocking extension.
Easy (Score:2, Interesting)
It's essentially that same reason why I mute TV commercials, or switch to another channel when ads come on for 4 minutes or so.
Blocking Ads (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:My reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
4) Pop-ups: Its my browser, my PC dont run around making windows on it!
Normally, I'm not a grammar nazi. But I had to call you on this one, since I had to go over it a few times before I realized you meant:
4) Pop-ups: It's my browser, my PC; don't run around making windows on it!
Re:My reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
All internet advertisers lost another pair eyes that day because one bad egg wouldn't let me view my
I block ads because... (Score:2, Interesting)
I block anything from doubleclick.net because of their history of violating the privacy of internet users and trying to tie anonymous web usage back to actual human beings.
I also block a lot of stuff just because I can as a way to assert my right to view and not view whatever I want on my computer. The media companies would have you believe that you must view ads to view their content. The Internet is the first medium in which the ads a user sees can actually be recorded, and frankly advertisers aren't liking what they're finding, which is that most people just don't pay attention to most ads unless they're extremely targeted. Fortunately new technologies are making it easier to generate really targeted ads without violating anyone's privacy.
I also block many ads because they're simply ugly.
Re:My reasons (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:My reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
An Ask Slashdot I would like to see is: Why do you (or anyone you know) put ads on your page? I mean unless you have massive traffic like sites like Slashdot have, are you actually making any money on them? For most people, the best they are probably going to do is cover their hosting costs. But really, web hosting is not that expensive. I'm not so self important to think that my personal webpage or an informational page that I put up is so valuable to people that they should accept being visually raped upon entering it. Am I the only one?
Re:My reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
2) Get my seat at the theater then go out for a smoke till a few minutes into the movie to avoid ads
3) Block internet ads
4) Crack the DVDs I rent and copy the vobs as the popcorn is popping so I don't have to watch the ads
5) Changed corner stores because the nearest one has an LCD screen at the checkout streaming ads
6) Never buy anything I've seen advertised as a matter of policy because I saw it advertised
7) Never buy my kid anything she's seen on TV because she saw it there
8) Don't listen to the radio
I do all this because I find mass advertising offensive. Makes me angry as hell. I honestly believe it makes you stupid. Since I stopped permitting them to brainwash me regularly, what little tolerance I had for it has disappeared and I honestly don't understand how people I go to visit can put up with watching TV or using IE.
Mass media advertising ought to be illegal as far as I'm concerned.
You misunderstand tolerance of acceptance. (Score:3, Interesting)
I think the huge amount of immigrants were tolerated like that. Sure some of the so called intellectuals just LOVED it all. Although I am one of those cynical people who happens to note that none of these so called intellectuals happen to live in immigrant neighbourhoods. Or even travel there.
Same as with ads, only a tiny percentage of people enjoy ads. For most of us, certainly myself they were never more then a necesarry evil, something to be tolerated because there really wasn't an alternative.
Just as there was no way to vote against immigrants before Pim Fortuyn arrived there was no way to not watch commercials before the arrival of tv torrents. Or indeed before the internet gave an alternative way to vegetate in front of a glowtube.
I think in both cases the irritation was tolerated until a certain treshhold was reached. Then when that was broken it just all burst out.
As to you calling Pim Fortuyn a right wing extremist. Most right wing extremist are well known for their hatred of Jews, Homosexuals and Women rights. Pim does certainly not qualify for hating any of them. Muslims do. The new extreme right does not wear jack boots, they were head scarfs. Only a true racist would claim that only white people can be racist.
The only reason I linked the two was because I think both are clear examples of people mistakingly believing people liked them and suddenly hated them. I think these kind of things fester for a long time until they suddenly erupt and then all the powers that be stand around scratching their heads and wondering what caused it. 10-30yrs of not regonizing enough is enough.
Re:My reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
So, in a word, yes.
Re:My reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
Your points about Consumer Reports objectivity are well received; they would almost certainly lose subscribers if any ads showed up at all.
National Geographic is a fantastic example, though, of how unnecessary advertising is in subscription magazines. This is not a small publication either in distribution, or in the length of the publication itself (it needs to be bound, not simply stapled). The articles in this magazine certainly cost tremendously more to research and produce than the articles in GQ, Cosmo, or Reader's Digest, yet they manage to do it without advertising.
It seems obvious to me that the other mags are purely focused on profit, and not with producing a good periodical. Therefore even a periodical which I found useful that was heavily advertising based, I'd avoid unless it was *necessary* for me to perform some function. Currently no ad-heavy periodicals meet that criteria, so I subscribe to none.
Re:My reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
I HATE those "you won an Xbox!" ads because people invariably CLICK on them, expecting something, and I have to explain how they didn't really win anything. EVERY TIME. Then they come up to me complaining the Internet broke and they didn't get their Xbox. *sigh*
bill hicks (Score:5, Interesting)
Quit putting a godamm dollar sign on every fucking thing on this planet!
"Ooh, the anger dollar. Huge. Huge in times of recession. Giant market, Bill's very bright to do that." God, I'm just caught in a fucking web! "Ooh the trapped dollar, big dollar, huge dollar. Good market - look at our research. We see that many people feel trapped. If we play to that and then separate them into the trapped dollar..." How do you live like that? And I bet you sleep like fucking babies at night, don't you?"
Re:Vote with your wallet (Score:3, Interesting)
Your Prius still pollutes and still requires gasoline, though it's considerably better than most cars out there.
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!
Re:PARENT IS ALL YOU NEED (Score:1, Interesting)
They are easy to block (Score:3, Interesting)
Advertising is evil. It is an attempt to manipulate me so that some corporation can profit while making stuff that noone needs. I turn TV sound off every time there is a commercial break (I don't watch TV myself, but I am sometimes present in a room when others do), I don't listen to radio ads. I throw away any paper spam, filter my e-mail and block online ad. As soon as I can use my augmented reality display to block real life ads, I will.
I once saw a reference to an old study that found that about 30% Americans would be willing to accept a lower standard of living as a price for eliminating all advertising. I am not surprised.