[Randman]

Linkage.

The end of free Internet content will come when Web browsers start blocking online advertisements by default, a DoubleClick executive has warned.
Bennie Smith, the online advertising network's privacy chief, told ZDNet Australia the popularity of tools like Adblock -- an extension to the Mozilla Firefox browser -- which makes blocking online ads simple was tied to "a negative vibe against advertising in general".

However, only the online arena is able to easily produce and widely distribute such tools, he added.

He said if a similar tool could be produced for newspapers, it would not be accepted by consumers.

"You'd go to your local corner shop and buy the daily paper, and you'd have these large holes where the ads were.

"You'd somehow feel like your 25 cents had not gotten full value," he said.

Talk about being

[CharlesS]

Actually, he's got a good point. I've never been a big fan of ad blockers for this reason. The ads are what keep the Internet free, and I don't mind supporting sites like MacNN that I visit frequently by clicking an ad banner every so often.

Now, the real problem is the annoying ads. The epilepsy-inducing red flashing "YOU'VE WON!!!!!!" ads, the ads that try to trick morons by looking like a Windows alert box, the ads with fast, constant animation which distracts from the page you're reading, the ads that deliberately try to get around pop-up blockers so that they can pop in your face and cover up the article you're reading, the "Hello, my name is Talky Tina and I'm going to kill you!" audio ads, and others are what cause these ad blockers to become popular. If it weren't for these annoying types of ads, no one would use things like adblock.

I remember the good old days, when banner ads were simple, unobtrusive, and sometimes actually described a product enough to make you interested in it, instead of trying to trick you into clicking it by pretending to be an error message, a "cute" little shoot-the-moron-who-designed-this-ad game, or an announcement that you've won the lottery. What happened?

[- - e r i k - -]

I started using PithHelmet the moment ads came with sounds. Talk about advertising shooting itself in the foot.

[wataru]

Their business model is broken. It broke the day they decided to annoy the hell out of browsers. They peed in their own pool and now they're bitching? I say they're reaping what they sowed.

[budster101]

People like that crack me up. What idiocy! They should all be fired.

[wdlove]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

I started using PithHelmet the moment ads came with sounds. Talk about advertising shooting itself in the foot.

My sound is turned off the majority of the time. These ads are just a part of life.

[Randman]

I fast forward through commercials on TV as well. Or switch channels. The missus is always amazed at how I can almost always surf for just the exact time it takes the commercials to run.

Or, I wait and buy the series on DVD such as 24 and CSI.

I hate advertising.

[wataru]

Originally Posted by wdlove

My sound is turned off the majority of the time. These ads are just a part of life.

Um, that's the whole point: They don't have to be.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by wataru

Um, that's the whole point: They don't have to be.

Yeah, but the problem is that those ads are the reason that web sites are free...

[Link]

Heh, usually when a site decides to get an advertising firm like that it's because they *cough* get a little greedy *cough* and want the higher returns even if that means poking their clients with a knife and then making sure they're still alive so they can poke them some more.

In all reality, I block the worst of them through camino extraprefs. I loathe them for the most part, and loathe the ones that tend to lag sites even more, tribalfusion anyone?

[Cody Dawg]

Unfortunately, this time I agree with Randman.

Plus, Randman Blog™.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Yeah, but the problem is that those ads are the reason that web sites are free...

No, ads are. Not those particular ads.

I don't block ads on a page. They aren't causing me to do anything extra. Sometimes I even CLICK on them.

I do however block ALL popup ads because of the annoyance of having to close them (Which sometimes just brings up even MORE)

Quick way to get people to stop blocking ads.

Stop annoying the customers you are trying to advertise to.

[wataru]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Yeah, but the problem is that those ads are the reason that web sites are free...

Ads? Yes. Annoying ads? No.

Google's text ads are fine. I don't think anyone really bothers to block those. You have every right to control what's on your screen, and there's nothing wrong with blocking annoying ads. If sites want that lost revenue back, they'll just have to come up with something less annoying.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by KevinK

No, ads are. Not those particular ads.

I don't block ads on a page. They aren't causing me to do anything extra. Sometimes I even CLICK on them.

Yeah, but the problem is that if you block all ads, you get the non-annoying ones too as well as the annoying ones.

Originally Posted by wataru

Google's text ads are fine. I don't think anyone really bothers to block those. You have every right to control what's on your screen, and there's nothing wrong with blocking annoying ads. If sites want that lost revenue back, they'll just have to come up with something less annoying.

Yeah, Google is pretty much the poster child for non-annoying ads. However, most sites like MacNN use the banner ads, and blocking those blocks the legit ones as well as the annoying ones.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Yeah, but the problem is that if you block all ads, you get the non-annoying ones too as well as the annoying ones.

True. That is why I don't block any ads but pop-op ads.. as I said.

Yeah, Google is pretty much the poster child for non-annoying ads. However, most sites like MacNN use the banner ads, and blocking those blocks the legit ones as well as the annoying ones.

I've clicked on those just to help NN out. I don't pay anything. The mods aren't getting payed... etc.

So me clicking on the ads is me paying for the ability for me to use NN. And continue to.

NN does a great job of trying to keep annoying ads off the page also.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by KevinK

True. That is why I don't block any ads but pop-op ads.. as I said.

The thread topic is about programs like PithHelmet and adblock, which are designed to block as many ads as possible, not just pop up ads (which I despise and support the blocking of 100%).

[esXXI]

I don't have much, if any problem with static image adverts (or text ads). But I absolutely hate the fashion of using moving/flashing/noisy flash ads that disrupts trying to actually concentrate on a page's content (and makes pages load slower, steals CPU usage, etc). A friend of mine is unlucky enough to often be barraged by that lucky-frog or whatever crap it is shouting "BEEP BEEP!" at 2AM.

Maybe if advertisers had some restraint, people wouldn't be blocking their ads - maybe if we didn't have banners flashing red and yellow claiming "YOU WON!!!!!!!!!!!" or "SHOOT THE DUCK!!!!" then it wouldn't of got to the stage of people detesting ads.

I thought I read somewhere that text-ads were far, far more likely to be read and clicked then picture/flash ones?

[jasonsRX7]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

I started using PithHelmet the moment ads came with sounds. Talk about advertising shooting itself in the foot.

I've never tried PithHelmet but I use Adblock at work for that very reason. I've clicked several ads on 'NN and even bought a few things (Vonage, Booq case) from the links I've clicked, but when that buzzing fly ad was going around, they almost got Adblocked.

[ghporter]

I have no problem with legitimate advertising; I don't mind seeing ads that don't eat up my CPU with animations and sound (I do NOT want my computer yelling at me to buy a product!), and I find it interesting to see what advertisers are attracted to what web sites.

I HATE pop-up and especially pop-under ads. That is NOT legitimate advertising; it's guerrilla advertising and to be considered on a par with leaflet distributers that badger people on the sidewalk.

I have worked in advertising, and the good agencies resist using bad techniques as long as the client lets them. I remember one client of the agency I worked for, Ollie Fretter, who insisted on doing his own horrible commercials. It was ugly. Good agencies actually turn down bad clients. But what agencies do Web ads? Where is their integrity?

[budster101]

It's like having someone fan their hand in front of your face with a handout while you are trying to watch television.

[Cody Dawg]

Or spraying perfume on you as you walk through a store - without your permission.

[budster101]

True: I was walkoing through a major department store in Chicago, and cut through the ladies perfume area, and some woman was getting hit with one of those crazed perfume peddlers and got some in my face. Try explaiing to your spouse why you smell like another woman's perfume! It didn't even smell that good. Tasted worse.

[jasonsRX7]

Originally Posted by budster101

I was walkoing through a major department store in Chicago, and cut through the ladies perfume area, and some woman was getting hit with one of those crazed perfume peddlers and got some in my face.

That's when you swing back by a little later and 'accidentally' spill a bottle of deer urine scent on the perfume counter. Oops!

[PacHead]

Ads suck and the people who spam such ads suck even worse.

From the "enlarge your tiny penis" ads in an inbox to the "click on this and you will win $10,000 !" banners on the net, these ads truly blow.

Ads on television also suck, even the ones on commercial free cable channels, where they often advertise for themselves. It's also the same damn ads being played over and over again. Hello ! Time Warner ! I am already your customer, stop showing me stupid, amateurish made Time Warner ads !

I don't get any ads and banners when I surf, I don't get any pop-ups (even if I visit the most deranged porn site out there), and when I need to purchase something, I know exactly what I want, and where to purchase it at.

Ad placements in major movies also suck, as it seems like such a sellout.

[Millennium]

You know, I wonder if there would be a market for an ad blocker which allowed non-annoying ads through and only attempted to block annoying ads. As a basis for determining what is annoying, I proposethe following behaviors:

• Ads which take control of the browser -such as popups- are annoying.
• Ads which are so large (in file size) as to significantly increase page download times are annoying.
• Ads which are so large (in page area) as to crowd out content or force the user to scroll are annoying.
• Large animations are annoying.
• "Multimedia" ads -particularly those containing audio or interactivity- are annoying.

With this in hand, I would construct a blocker based on three principles. One, non-annoying behaviors should always be let through, even if they are ads (this rewards advertisers for non-annoying behavior, which ought to encourage less annoying advertisements). Two, annoying behaviors should not be blocked irreversibly; the user should always have the option to let something through (the user might want to see a particular ad, or the blocker could mistakenly affect an image not meant to be an advertisement). Three, even if an ad is blocked, space should be made for it (except in the case of very large images), because sites are often designed to accommodate ads and so we should disrupt that layout as little as possible.

• Popup windows are blocked, period.
• Images over 75K are replaced by click-to-view buttons, but images under that file size are displayed.
• Animated GIFs over 10K in filesize are overlaid by a click-to-animate button.
• All Flash animations are replaced by a click-to-play button; they are not downloaded at all until the button is clicked.
• Images containing over 76,800 pixels (320x240 for a square-ish image, though this can be stretched in either direction) are replaced by a click-to-view button, similar to the click-to-play for Flash.

The point behind this exercise is to create an ad blocker which rewards non-annoying ads by letting them through, while still blocking annoying advertisements. Note that even the last rule (the one based on pixel count) lets through all standard ad sizes except for the new "tower" 160x600 size.

Do people think this would go over well on the general Web-browsing populace? The idea is not to block out advertisements per se, but to stop them from being annoying. Advertisers can get around the block simply by making non-annoying ads, without any need for complex technical wizardry. They don't have to waste any money on researching ways around our block, because we tell them how to get around it: stop annoying Web users.

[- - e r i k - -]

Very good ideas Millennium. *applause*

Now lets get some rules for that into PithHelmet.

[Randman]

Pithhelmet's pretty good about configuring many things. And you can edit per site as well, which is also nice.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Randman

Pithhelmet's pretty good about configuring many things. And you can edit per site as well, which is also nice.

I found with all the processing it does that it actually makes things slower.

[wataru]

I found that Pithhelmet slowed Safari down too.

[Randman]

A few builds were buggy but the latest pithhelmet has been rock solid with Safari 2.0. Still the fastest browser I can find.

[Eug Wanker]

What do you expect from a DoubleClick executive?

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Advertisers can get around the block simply by making non-annoying ads, without any need for complex technical wizardry. They don't have to waste any money on researching ways around our block, because we tell them how to get around it: stop annoying Web users.

In an ideal world, this is what would happen. However, you know what would actually happen.

It's like with pop-up ads. You'd think they wouldn't have to waste any money on finding ways around the pop-up blockers, because we've basically told them the way around: stop annoying Web users with pop-ups. However, in practice, do they give up and decide, "okay, we'll just make banner ads then, and stop being annoying"? No, they just figure out ways around the pop-up blockers.

Not to say the idea of an annoying ad blocker isn't a good one. It would be quite useful, although it probably would flag a lot of false positives on a site like homestarrunner.com.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Not to say the idea of an annoying ad blocker isn't a good one. It would be quite useful, although it probably would flag a lot of false positives on a site like homestarrunner.com.

That's what whitelists are for.

Although in a perfect world you wouldn't need whitelists anyway.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

However, in practice, do they give up and decide, "okay, we'll just make banner ads then, and stop being annoying"? No, they just figure out ways around the pop-up blockers.

There's a difference between the advertisers who use pop-ups and the ones who don't. The ones that don't care about you as a customer and should be rewarded. The ones that DO use pop-ups don't give a rat's behind about you, they just want to get their product in your face. The last time someone tried to do that to me in person, I "stumbled" because of the "disorientation" caused by his assault, and fell on him. In public, in front of EVERYBODY. The advertising drone immediately appologized for "tripping" me, but everybody saw what happened and they avoided him like the plague. Likewise, I DO NOT buy from any company that uses pop-ups, particularly the really annoying ones with sound and lots of animation.

[Kerrigan]

I've noticed that a lot of adds are getting more sophisticated, in the sense that they make you stop what you are doing and look for a second. I'm talking about those adds that have, say, the pig with the stretched out belly that wobbles up and down and on the belly there are fifty tiny little flashing states. Or the one that has the 50 tiny dancing aligators/bugs... they are really strange and irritating, but they make you stop and look for a moment while you wonder to yourself "what the hell is that?"

Also, the Jamster ones really catch my attention, and I hate those ads the worst. Particularly Mr Chaos.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by ghporter

There's a difference between the advertisers who use pop-ups and the ones who don't. The ones that don't care about you as a customer and should be rewarded. The ones that DO use pop-ups don't give a rat's behind about you, they just want to get their product in your face.

See, that's kind of my point. You could say the same thing about the companies who deliberately make Flash ad banners as annoying as possible. They don't give a damn. They'd work to find ways around the blocker rather than making their ads less annoying.

[ghporter]

Ever heard of "New Coke?" The fact that Coke dumped the new formula is proof that the public can get the attention of big business and force them to make changes. It just takes a lot of people getting just a little involved.

I've considered keeping track of the ads that I find annoying and eventually contacting the advertisers to let them know what I hate about them. It would take that sort of thing, and a form letter or email that you send out EVERY TIME you see the ad. Another tack is to set up an online petition demanding that the advertiser give up the annoying practice. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to get that sort of thing started-I'm browsing while I'm doing homework right now.

[Eriamjh]

We wouldn't have pop-up clockers if they weren't so DAMN annoying! When you try to force the ads down our throat, we WILL do what we can to avoid them.

[JHromadka]

The only thing I block are popups. I see the general ads as a cost-of-entry and don't think people should block them because it's like stealing. Only audio surprises piss me off, and for those I stop going to the site.

[mitchell_pgh]

I don't mind banners, but they constantly push the edge. I don't like the "drop down" "drop over" ads when you mouse over and the sound ads are too much.

I'm guilty of playing the "game" ads from time to time.

[davesimondotcom]

I've always found online advertising to be wrong. Not the concept of advertising online. The way it's done.

Google ads get it much closer to right - text based ads you can easily ignore, but give you a reason to pay attention to them other than annoying blinking - they are relevant to your search.

Take the ad I'm looking at right now on MacNN. For Alienware. Well, considering I am a Mac user, I use a PC only to test websites, and that PC is a loaner from a friend (that he doesn't care if he gets back), and I have an Xbox and PS2 for gaming, I could give a flip about Alienware. So why show me the ad?

The annoyance factor of popups, ads with sound, fake dialog boxes, animated deals that move all over and say "free whatever if you click on the whatever" are the biproduct of the way the web came about. People failed to THINK in the 90s about how advertising could be made more attractive to the viewer.

Imagine if you were watching TV and all of a sudden, an ad popped up in the middle of the program you were watching. Not during a planned break, right in the middle. It would never happen. (OK, it happens in the form of the increasingly large graphic advertising for the show that is coming next and the icon for the station you are on.)

Being in advertising myself, it's not a surprise to me that people think that popups are effective. Many people have said to me that their ad should use more of the space, to fill things up, they are paying for a half page, USE IT ALL! They don't care if the font is down to 5 pt. They don't understand whitespace or design for that matter.

Look at the average website. Not the professionally designed ones. Take a look at the FrontPage designed ones on Angelfire. The animated mailbox icons that open and close. Stuff like that is what lots of people think is "cool" - but even they don't click on annoying popups.