Fortune:
Ad-blocking software is estimated to cost websites nearly $22 billion in ad revenue this year.
Software that blocks digital ads will cost online publishers nearly $22 billion in advertising revenue this year, according to a new study.
That figure comes by way of a new study from Adobe Systems Page Fair, an Irish startup that caters to websites and advertisers looking to avoid those so-called “ad-blocking” practices.
As a content creator, this is a disturbing statistic (and one I take with a truckload of salt because of the inherent bias in the study’s creator) but it’s a problem brought on by the industry itself. If ads hadn’t gotten so intrusive and obnoxious, perhaps their intended recipients wouldn’t be working so hard to avoid them. And it’s only going to get worse for both sides.
And instead of finding better, less-intrusive ways to get their messages out, ad groups will respond in the worst way possible, by lobbying legislators to ban blockers.
I installed Ghostery this morning and set it to block everything by default. I’m already unblocking systems on sites I like, including The Deck and Disqus here: Disqus because I want its functionality, The Deck because it’s unobtrusive and I know what it’s doing.
But I’m keeping ChartBeat, eXelate, Google Analytics, GoSquared and Qauntcast blocked for now because I don’t know what they’re doing.
Word-for-word I’m doing the same thing, having installed Ghostery last month. I’m never sure that the analytics companies are up to, besides slowing down my browsing.
If I’d heard of Ghostery last month I’d have installed it last month. 🙂
It’s a difficult balance. Publishers need revenue and consumers want less irritation and intrusion.
An interesting thing started with my local area newspaper online site only yesterday.
While their IOS targeted ( iphone / ipad) advertising was an irritation, being placed into the articles every few paragraphs, you accepted it, you could scroll past.
As from yesterday they have started advertising with modal windows. You get perhaps 10 seconds to start reading the article, and then up comes a modal ad, that fills the entire screen on IOS (phone and ipad) with a very tiny little X in the corner that doesn’t register the dismissive touch very well.
You think that is going to make me want to know more about the advertiser? Hell no, I compile a shit-list of companies that start their christmas TV advertising before 1st Nov each year. It’s been 10 years since I have spent a single penny in Boots or Halfords because of that. You think throwing up a modal that I HAVE to hunt and click ( and click and click) to dismiss is helping your revenue?
Advertising is a necessary evil, we all know that, most of us accept it, however, when it becomes and interference it is actually a detriment to your brand.
If you listened to Your Mac Life, you would have known about it last month. 🙂
lol!
I’m not sure this is much different from those who have the Post Office exclude unaddressed ad-mail from their mailbox, or those like me who toss the bundle of sale flyers from the newspaper in the recycle bin unread, or those who bypass radio advertising by streaming, or skip ads in other ways.
I agree that advertisers need to find better and less obtrusive ways to reach customers. So far, I find myself moving away from sites with ads I have to dismiss, however maybe there also needs to be some form of micro-payment system so we can reward sites we value!
If you read Marco Arment’s “The ethics of modern web ad-blocking” (http://www.marco.org/2015/08/11/ad-blocking-ethics), he makes very clear how and what the differences are.
I have been using Ghostery for a while, first to monitor tracking on sites and more recently to block obnoxious stuff. I only recently added ad blocker extensions because of the obnoxious and poorly coded ad delivery systems. It still hasn’t stopped the obnoxious and intrusive methods of the sites themselves however. I am finding I am reducing my web surfing drastically, relying on a few sites like The Loop and Daring Fireball to link to content. And depending on the source, I often don’t click the link through.
These sites attempts to get clicks have lost readership. They might get to sell the click, but the command-W that follows is the ultimate loss for them. It’s a sad testament that my fingers are poised over those keys when visiting websites anymore.
Heh. I really need to find more time to listen to podcasts I like. 🙂
Thanks for the link, Shawn. I haven’t been to Marco’s site in a while…… Good read.
I still contend that I’ve as much right to block ads as ask the Post Office to not deliver ad-mail. The reasons for blocking internet delivered ads are much stronger given the discussion on Marco.org, though.
Think of it this way.
Next time you stumble across a Youtube video that has an Ad inserted into the beginning.
You have 5 seconds to dismiss the ad. The ad MUST grab you in the first 5 seconds or you will click the “skip” button.
Grab my attention in 2 or 3 seconds I may watch your Ad, ramble for 6 or 7 seconds with an intro and some music and your skipped.
My behaviour exactly. However some ads can’t be skipped!
That is true, but the nature is as soon as possible to skip. You MUST grab the attention in the first few seconds.
If you bore me with music or a long intro .. i’m gone.
I dont have a great deal of time for Marco as he can spend 3 hours complaining about a gifted coffee cup. And then spend 5 hours complaining about the beans gifted to him. So i dont hold him in much regard.
You however, i expect something from.
Dont piss off the reader, ever.
I generally agree with your comments about Marco. He can be a little pedantic. But his piece made some really good points, especially about the difference between TV and web ads.
Agreed…
“Intrusive and Obnoxious” is exactly right. Don’t mind looking at ads.. but they need to learn to STAY IN THE BACKGROUND No Auto Movie play… No Auto Audio Play.. Just STOP. the Loop is a perfect example of how to do this right!!
Same, but using uBlock. I know exactly what GA does: Add 1-2s to every page load. Never, ever turning that on.