Ad Exec on Blockers: "Little Piss Ants" Threaten Freedom of Speech

[Kajin]

I wouldn't have such a problem with ads if they showed me things I actually wanted or wasn't already aware of.

 

[Reasonable Atheist]

I really don't get how using an adblocker can be morally justified.

I keep reading things in this thread like "Ads are intrusive and are infringing on my enjoyment of the website I am visiting, make my browser lag, ec. ec."

So you don't like how the website you are using is running their business and don't want to support it. That I get, perfectly, and you are absolutely entitled to do that as the responsible consumer you are.

But how can you now go on and say: "I am not supporting your business, because I don't like your ads, but I still feel entitled to consume your content, because ... it is my god given right as internet denizen?"

To me this looks like stealing. A very mild form of stealing, admittedly, but stealing nonetheless.

Oh for heaven's sake. Just call it what it it is: theft. It's selfish and causes problems for content creators who have to sell more ad space to compensate, and users without adblock who have to put up with all the extra ads because some people are too self important to cope with a couple of ads. We are visitors to other people's sites, and we should be abiding by their rules.

Not even close to stealing, you have a right not to download anything you want on your own personal computer. The idea that not downloading something could be stealing is totally ludicrous.

If somebody's business model relies on people willingly downloading garbage, that is their own problem and the consumer is not to blame if they fail.

 

[FalloutJack]

Has anybody mentioned to them that it's the same as a mute button on a TV remote? I mean, you have the right to be annoyed, but the TV still mutes, regardless.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

It's a thread where we're all mostly agreeing that the guy's a dick.

I like this.

Let's do more of this.

As for the subject? I'm pub club. Therefore, I'll admit to using a blocker. Why? Because fucking malware. It's ridiculous how many of those things, on sites you would think were sorta reputable, are chock full of wormy, monstrous crap.

No shame whatsoever. Screw this guy and the people who throw that shit in our faces on a daily basis.

To make up for it, I subscribe to things and donate to patreons and what-not, if I like the thing and want to see more of it.

Ya know. Basic give and take.

 

[one squirrel]

I really don't get how using an adblocker can be morally justified.

I keep reading things in this thread like "Ads are intrusive and are infringing on my enjoyment of the website I am visiting, make my browser lag, ec. ec."

So you don't like how the website you are using is running their business and don't want to support it. That I get, perfectly, and you are absolutely entitled to do that as the responsible consumer you are.

But how can you now go on and say: "I am not supporting your business, because I don't like your ads, but I still feel entitled to consume your content, because ... it is my god given right as internet denizen?"

To me this looks like stealing. A very mild form of stealing, admittedly, but stealing nonetheless.

Oh for heaven's sake. Just call it what it it is: theft. It's selfish and causes problems for content creators who have to sell more ad space to compensate, and users without adblock who have to put up with all the extra ads because some people are too self important to cope with a couple of ads. We are visitors to other people's sites, and we should be abiding by their rules.

Not even close to stealing, you have a right not to download anything you want on your own personal computer. The idea that not downloading something could be stealing is totally ludicrous.

If somebody's business model relies on people willingly downloading garbage, that is their own problem and the consumer is not to blame if they fail.

I don't understand how you get to this. I never said that "not downloading" = "stealing", I said, (and that's only If we even want to equate having to watch ads to potentially downloading malware, which seems rather hysteric), that "not downloading + consuming content which is financed by said download" equals "stealing". It seems you overlooked one half of my statement. You are getting a service and give nothing in return.

I am certainly not going to pass a judgement on anyone for using addblock. I can understand why people do it. But I don't get where this sort of entitlement comes from. Noone owes you anything.

 

[marioandsonic]

I'll usually use an ad blocker on my computer for most sites. However, when I try to visit those same sites on my phone, the difference is day and night. The moment I open a page on my phone, one or two new tabs will pop up, telling me I'm the 10,000,000th visitor to the site, or something. It's annoying as hell.

And let's not even get into the whole threat of malware.

Get rid of ads and popups like this, and maybe, maybe, I'll stop using an ad blocker.

 

[Syzygy23]

He added that they were diminishing freedom of expression.

Is that what they're calling it now? I call it "enhancing freedom of smooth internet browsing".

Escapists, it's time for you folk to weigh in. Do you use ad-blocking software (no judgment!)? Where do you stand on this?

You know admitting to using adblocker on this site is against the CoC, right? I assume this hasn't changed since the last time I read it.

Unless an admin clears this up we're gonna get a whole lot of warnings incoming.

Jesus, seriously? No other site with a forums/message board I know of has any such clause in their TOS. What sort of dystopian cyberpunk pro-corporate bullshit is this? Not even Reddit has any such rule.

I think I'll just go to another site for gaming/tech related news if that's how it's going to be. And yeah, I use an adblocker on everything except a few youtubers videos. Anything that would get in between me and the things I want to read/watch/play or slow down and clutter my browser can fuck right off. I don't give a shit about revenue streams or advertising dollars, if you're going to annoy me and waste my time like that then I reserve the right to not tolerate it. I suppose any impending warning or ban will decide whether the escapist is made of bullshit and I move on/

 

[one squirrel]

He added that they were diminishing freedom of expression.

Is that what they're calling it now? I call it "enhancing freedom of smooth internet browsing".

Escapists, it's time for you folk to weigh in. Do you use ad-blocking software (no judgment!)? Where do you stand on this?

You know admitting to using adblocker on this site is against the CoC, right? I assume this hasn't changed since the last time I read it.

Unless an admin clears this up we're gonna get a whole lot of warnings incoming.

Jesus, seriously? No other site with a forums/message board I know of has any such clause in their TOS. What sort of dystopian cyberpunk pro-corporate bullshit is this? Not even Reddit has any such rule.

I think I'll just go to another site for gaming/tech related news if that's how it's going to be. And yeah, I use an adblocker on everything except a few youtubers videos. Anything that would get in between me and the things I want to read/watch/play or slow down and clutter my browser can fuck right off. I don't give a shit about revenue streams or advertising dollars, if you're going to annoy me and waste my time like that then I reserve the right to not tolerate it. I suppose any impending warning or ban will decide whether the escapist is made of bullshit and I move on/

And why exactly should the Escapist care if you're here or not? You are already not adding anything to their revenue.

 

[Flames66]

I really don't get how using an adblocker can be morally justified.

I keep reading things in this thread like "Ads are intrusive and are infringing on my enjoyment of the website I am visiting, make my browser lag, ec. ec."

So you don't like how the website you are using is running their business and don't want to support it. That I get, perfectly, and you are absolutely entitled to do that as the responsible consumer you are.

Please don't insult everyone here.

But how can you now go on and say: "I am not supporting your business, because I don't like your ads, but I still feel entitled to consume your content, because ... it is my god given right as internet denizen?"

To me this looks like stealing. A very mild form of stealing, admittedly, but stealing nonetheless.

Because I am still entitled to consume the content. There is no rule, regulation or agreement , that anyone has ever agreed to that says you must look at these adverts before you can see this content. The content has been put up for open viewing on the internet. Yes I would like to support the creators, but I am in no way obligated to do so. I haven't signed any agreements and I haven't been granted access to an exclusive club. This content is placed online on an open, free to access site.

I'll usually use an ad blocker on my computer for most sites. However, when I try to visit those same sites on my phone, the difference is day and night. The moment I open a page on my phone, one or two new tabs will pop up, telling me I'm the 10,000,000th visitor to the site, or something. It's annoying as hell.

And let's not even get into the whole threat of malware.

Get rid of ads and popups like this, and maybe, maybe, I'll stop using an ad blocker.

Exactly. It is not my responsibility to police adverts. It is the responsibility of the site owners to make sure their site is not being obnoxious or sending out malware.

 

[Chewster]

Once again an out of touch CEO decides to attack his potential audience instead of finding new and creative ways to market on the Internet without being a completely obtrusive, obnoxious asshole. Good shit.

Also, I'd have more sympathy if my Goddamned YouTube ads didn't play in perfect HD followed by five seconds of lagging before the video begins chugging along at frigging 144p. Not cool, man.

EDIT: My favorite though, has to be being forced to watch a trailer for a film...before getting to watch a trailer for a film. It's almost sublime how ridiculous it gets.

EDIT EDIT: While we're here, can we agree to get rid of those "Around the web" listicle links? Those things are the worst kind of Internet cancer, along with clickbait "you won't believe what came next" headlines. Respectable organizations host these ads, man. Stop it right now.

 

[h@wke]

Just because you have freedom of speech doesn't mean people have to listen

 

[Reasonable Atheist]

I really don't get how using an adblocker can be morally justified.

I keep reading things in this thread like "Ads are intrusive and are infringing on my enjoyment of the website I am visiting, make my browser lag, ec. ec."

So you don't like how the website you are using is running their business and don't want to support it. That I get, perfectly, and you are absolutely entitled to do that as the responsible consumer you are.

But how can you now go on and say: "I am not supporting your business, because I don't like your ads, but I still feel entitled to consume your content, because ... it is my god given right as internet denizen?"

To me this looks like stealing. A very mild form of stealing, admittedly, but stealing nonetheless.

Oh for heaven's sake. Just call it what it it is: theft. It's selfish and causes problems for content creators who have to sell more ad space to compensate, and users without adblock who have to put up with all the extra ads because some people are too self important to cope with a couple of ads. We are visitors to other people's sites, and we should be abiding by their rules.

Not even close to stealing, you have a right not to download anything you want on your own personal computer. The idea that not downloading something could be stealing is totally ludicrous.

If somebody's business model relies on people willingly downloading garbage, that is their own problem and the consumer is not to blame if they fail.

I don't understand how you get to this. I never said that "not downloading" = "stealing", I said, (and that's only If we even want to equate having to watch ads to potentially downloading malware, which seems rather hysteric), that "not downloading + consuming content which is financed by said download" equals "stealing". It seems you overlooked one half of my statement. You are getting a service and give nothing in return.

I am certainly not going to pass a judgement on anyone for using addblock. I can understand why people do it. But I don't get where this sort of entitlement comes from. Noone owes you anything.

Forget malware, blocking an add is just choosing not to download the add

 

[Torque2100]

Well EXCUSE ME!

I'm sure Mr. Rothenberg will never read this, but he and men like him brought this on themselves by refusing to police their adserv services and allowing advertising companies to flood the internet with ads that execute malicious code, broswer session hijacks and those annoying "Wait! You're missing out on a great deal!" error messages that pop up when you try to close the popups.

I fully support Adblock allowing ads on pages that submit their adservs to strict monitoring. People like Mr. Rothenberg have had it their own way for far too long.

I will continue using adblock and only disable it on sites I support, and whom I trust not to run malicious adverts.

 

[RolandOfGilead]

It's funny. I don't run ad-blockers per se, but I do run noscript and similar because ads with scripts are security problems. Just make your ads text or images, then we won't have this problem anymore, unless people go to the trouble of blocking images from specific domains.

Also, The Escapist (and Amazon wtf) becomes literally unusable if you let every script run (last time I tried anyway).

 

[Reed Spacer]

Wait. There are ads on the internet?