No, advertisers killed the web by making it user-hostile and profit-first. Ad blockers are the FO part of FAFO.
bitpush•1mo ago
I use adblockers, but I'll play devil's advocate to understand your position a bit better.
The article argues this as well, but how do you want all these publishers to make money? If I pay for NYT, that's not a dollar spent on Washington Post or LA times or The Globe. With advertisements, a "little bit" was spend on all of those sites.
So what's the way out here? Please dont say that everything should be free.
kevin061•1mo ago
I use adblockers as well. It is not really my problem to solve. I wish it wasn't this way, but I do not know what I would do differently.
Think of it this way: Before Spotify, music piracy was a massive problem. Then Netflix came to do the same for audiovisual content. Then, greedy publishers saw they were paying fees to Netflix, so they all rushed to build their own media kingdoms. Now, audiovisual piracy is at an all-time high, and these companies are all locked into a fight that will make all of them lose simultaneously.
To the same extent, this ad problem was caused by ad companies themselves and their lack of regulation. Aggressive ads that opened and displayed animations full screen laid over the text you are trying to read, deceptive ads with scams, or straight-up malware.
How would I solve it? I would have started like 40 years ago tightly regulating the advertisement industry. Since I do not have a time machine, that option is not really possible. Now, consumer trust in ads is absolutely shattered, and even if we rolled out good regulations tomorrow, people would still be extremely hostile towards advertisements. I know I would. I aggressively suppress ads wherever I go. I do not tolerate "unobtrusive ads" like some ad blockers offer.
Ads are a way to extract money out of individuals that would otherwise not be spending. The advertisement industry has gone too far and is now facing the natural consequences of their actions.
Again, this is the "FO" in "FAFO".
jeffwask•1mo ago
> To the extend that a newspaper site of today reminds you of illegal download or porn sites of the early 2000s.
This is so accurate as to how I feel hitting most major sites w/o an adblocker. Popups, automatic video blaring at max volume, annoying animations... it's 100% like hitting a Warez site.
bitpush•1mo ago
Went in skeptic, but this is an interesting framing. I dont disagree.
> "The web isn’t free – it is open, and there’s a difference"
kevin061•1mo ago
bitpush•1mo ago
The article argues this as well, but how do you want all these publishers to make money? If I pay for NYT, that's not a dollar spent on Washington Post or LA times or The Globe. With advertisements, a "little bit" was spend on all of those sites.
So what's the way out here? Please dont say that everything should be free.
kevin061•1mo ago
Think of it this way: Before Spotify, music piracy was a massive problem. Then Netflix came to do the same for audiovisual content. Then, greedy publishers saw they were paying fees to Netflix, so they all rushed to build their own media kingdoms. Now, audiovisual piracy is at an all-time high, and these companies are all locked into a fight that will make all of them lose simultaneously.
To the same extent, this ad problem was caused by ad companies themselves and their lack of regulation. Aggressive ads that opened and displayed animations full screen laid over the text you are trying to read, deceptive ads with scams, or straight-up malware.
How would I solve it? I would have started like 40 years ago tightly regulating the advertisement industry. Since I do not have a time machine, that option is not really possible. Now, consumer trust in ads is absolutely shattered, and even if we rolled out good regulations tomorrow, people would still be extremely hostile towards advertisements. I know I would. I aggressively suppress ads wherever I go. I do not tolerate "unobtrusive ads" like some ad blockers offer.
Ads are a way to extract money out of individuals that would otherwise not be spending. The advertisement industry has gone too far and is now facing the natural consequences of their actions.
Again, this is the "FO" in "FAFO".