This is a snowball effect case. You can't argue on a personal morality level with this one. This is a case where something becomes wrong because too many people are doing the same thing and ruining something. Hence the "too much trash" analogy, (that you cut out of my quotes and didn't address because it doesn't suit you I guess). And there is always cause and effect when something like this happens, and while I don't have numbers it's pretty freaking evident that too many adblockers are having a negative effect on advertisers, who in turn pass the buck off to those who don't use it. If your audience goes down and you can't up your view count in your demographics, (which is the only thing that matters, butt in seat or not) you milk those who are still around. Sites with lots of tech savvy users probably have this the worst.Aardvaarkman said:Yes, but blocking ads isn't stealing. Are you stealing a TV show when you go to make a cup of coffee during the ad break, rather than watching the ad?Furrama said:I guess Jim is better than me, because I will point fingers. Stealing is stealing.
That doesn't seem logical. The people blocking the ads are not the ones who create the ads, or run the ads. Why do you not blame the sites that choose to run these ads? They are the people responsible for running the ads, not those who block themFurrama said:You have people like me who don't turn on adblock because I get how the money flows. The people who are using adblock, you are the guys that are making the ads more intrusive for ME.
You're going to need to show some evidence for your claim that ads are getting more intrusive because of ad blocking. Do you really believe that ads would suddenly get less intrusive if everybody stopped ad blocking?Furrama said:They're getting worse and more interruptive as time goes on because I'm one of the few "paying my dues". And I do remember back when they weren't nearly so bad, especially on higher end sites that weren't what you call "shady" to begin with.
There's also many other reasons why ads have gotten more intrusive over time:
1. Technology - people have fast connections today, so streaming video and animation, etc. is a lot more viable than in the past.
2. Audience - the internet has grown very rapidly, so there are many more people online to sell ads to.
3. Competition - the online advertising market has also grown rapidly, so advertisers have to compete with other ads.
The idea that Adblock users have an significant impact on this seems absurd. The vast majority of people browse without Adblock. And because of the growth of internet users, the number of people viewing websites without Adblock has grown over time, not shrunk. So how does it make any logical sense to blame more intrusive ads on Adblock?
I feel that your sense of outrage and blame may be wildly misplaced.
The worst thing about this is that you can't put the genie back in the bottle. If everyone stopped using adblock right now the ads would not get less intrusive and video makers would not take out the extra commercials. It would almost always be a lose lose situation for them.
And your argument is shot in the foot with the three point tech/audience/competition thing. If MORE people are getting online to see these ads, then why aren't people getting the money for the numbers that they're earning? What about the little guys who are getting shafted in this? You can look at the charts for your precious numbers, in the video even, they're pulling in about half of what they should be. Sometimes even less!
And if you want to give a last line of moral judgement, so can I. You sound like the sort who wants to do what they want, damn the consequences, and justifies it to themselves and washes their hands of it.
It isn't ALL your trash, right?