Current Events > Ethically, is ad-blocking wrong?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Realized yet another website shows this message now:


---

No, because ads often hide malware that try to install themselves into their system, and ad services are horrible at filtering these out.

Can't blame people for taking the precautions to protect themselves.
---

autoplaying videos with sound and redirecting popups are also ethically wrong. Ad blocking is the lesser evil.

it's not a loss of revenue, because even without ad block I don't click on ads, unless the goal of the advertiser is simply an awareness campaign instead of seeking redirects.
---

If the internet was free, maybe, but it's not so they get blocked
---

Yes, it's the only way many small sites can make revenue without having to charge for subscription or whatever. Certain sites like YouTube just don't deserve it though
---

My bandwidth, my choice.
---

Ethics got thrown out the window when even big name sites (including this one) allowed malware infested ads, extremely intrusive ads, and ads to shady non legitimate services, etc.
When it became a matter of protecting my PC and system ad block became a must.
---

No. Fuck ads.
---

No, it's not wrong. When I want to read a news story, I don't need to see moving pictures of anime girls. Sure, I'll turn off my ad blocker and wait 10 minutes for my page to load, not respond, go super choppy, etc.

This site used to have outright pornography. The people at the top see the dollar signs and don't even bother to check that a family friendly site shows full frontal nudity. Don't force your stuff on me.
---

No.
I came here for gamefaqs - not taboola, pagefair, indexww, agkn, sharethrough, google-analytics, qualtrix, demdex, criteo, scorecardresearch, or cbsi.

All adblocking really is, is denying access to or from an untrusted internet host.

If you installed a pc game and it came bundled with unrelated code of unknown origin and content that automatically ran outside of your control whenever you run the game.... that would basically be considered malicious / a virus

So why can ads do it?
---

Nope, ads during media are a very petty way to generate revenue.
---

No. If ads didn't have malware, didn't have loud noises, or flashy animations, and didn't jump to the center of the screen, then maybe adblocking could be wrong.
---

I get where they are coming from, website ads can be a source of extra revenue.

That said, they completely fucked the bridge of trust with full-screen overlays, auto-play/unskippable videos, questionable ad content, and other such bullshit that does nothing but piss off the end users.
If they really wanted us to include their ads so bad, they wouldn't have given us such incentive to hide them.

Is it ethically wrong to change the channel on my TV when an ad plays?
---

there are no ethics in advertising, so I dont care about the ethics of blocking it
---

no. I don't click on ads anyways
---

blablablax17 posted...

Is it ethically wrong to change the channel on my TV when an ad plays?

The difference there, is that Mt. Dew paid ahead of time. Web ads, in contrast, pay for every thousand times the ad actually loaded.

If TV ads (or billboards) ever somehow managed to be as intrusive and invasive as web ads, there'd be riots and lawsuits.

No. Ads piss me off to the extent that I will avoid that product. Companies are more likely to get my business if I don't see their ads.
---

One reason why I like Linus Tech Tips and Howard Stern is because they set aside a few seconds to advertise a product themselves. So no possibility for malware scripts. That's the ethical way to do it.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

No. Ads piss me off to the extent that I will avoid that product. Companies are more likely to get my business if I don't see their ads.

Also this. I'm more likely to support you when you publicly announce you won't support Breitbart.
---

It depends on how much you value the website you're on getting money from your click there.

That said, I find a lot of tricks they use with ads to be outright unethical, so that goes both ways. Ads with fake close buttons that just bring you to the site, ads that play music or force open to block the whole screen, or ads that bring you to malware infested shit holes. Ad makers can do a lot of shady shit.

I would say if you really trust the site, and want them to make a small amount on your visit, add that website as an exception. Otherwise, fuck em.
---

have advertisers ever actually tried to sue adblockers for "stealing" or something?
---

No
---

It's about as unethical as changing the channel when commercials come on tv
---

I will say though, if I could be GUARANTEED that ALL ads would be non-intrusive and free of malware I would personally stop using adblock. I dont want to strip websites of ad revenue but I'm not letting some shitty 3rd party fill my experience with shit so you can make a couple cents off my views.
---

It's far more ethical than websites that serve ads that are either obtrusive (play sounds, videos, change size spontaneously, or pop over content) or deliver malicious payloads.
---

I'd be more inclined to support content creators I like via alternate means.

That's just good business practice anyway - all your eggs in one basket = bad news
---

If we ever have to stop using an adblocker here I'm posting screen caps of every porn ad I get on the Pokémon boards.
---

halomonkey1_3_5 posted...

I will say though, if I could be GUARANTEED that ALL ads would be non-intrusive and free of malware I would personally stop using adblock.

If a site hosts a jpeg itself, and codes the hyperlink right into the html, adblockers won't block it.
That just, you know, takes a hell of a lot more effort than a magic-money-button javascript snippet, and requires finding advertisers who will pay upfront instead of milking "non-identifiable" profiles across countless other sites.

PokemonHunter69 posted...

One reason why I like Linus Tech Tips and Howard Stern is because they set aside a few seconds to advertise a product themselves. So no possibility for malware scripts. That's the ethical way to do it.

LTT is basically a channel of commercials. And dropping expensive equipment.
---

I have a limited amount of mobile data so I'm not trying to waste it on advertisements
---

ChromaticAngel posted...

PokemonHunter69 posted...

One reason why I like Linus Tech Tips and Howard Stern is because they set aside a few seconds to advertise a product themselves. So no possibility for malware scripts. That's the ethical way to do it.

LTT is basically a channel of commercials. And dropping expensive equipment.

I love LTT
It's informative, and I like the dumb shit they do.
---

Nope. The web is a request medium. I request a web page, the server chooses to send it to me, and I choose what gets displayed and executed on the computer I own. Nobody is forcing them to send me anything, they can deny my request if they want to.
---

Gamer99z posted...

Ethics got thrown out the window when even big name sites (including this one) allowed malware infested ads, extremely intrusive ads, and ads to shady non legitimate services, etc.
When it became a matter of protecting my PC and system ad block became a must.

---

adblocking will become unethical when ads have become ethical
---

theres no such thing as objective ethics
---

The main reason why i even USE adblocking is the way youtube does ads..

Thats just... not the right way imo.

And the standard 5 seconds before video isnt even the worst ones... no thats the videos where you get such an ad EVERY THREE MINUTES or so...
---

The whole concept of ads is just bizarre.

Like, if you could imagine yourself stepping out of all knowledge you have about the way the world works, and were being introduced to it piece by piece.

Someone explaining ads would have to go, "Ah, see, this TV program, is entertainment. It's made by people trying to make something to watch, that other people enjoy...and it's regularly interrupted by several minutes of things no one wants to see. So that they get money"


And that's just TV. Ads on like, billboards or whatever are more benign in comparison, but on the flip side, internet ads are regularly war more malicious and invasive.


To use the internet, you gotta pay for some sort of device, whether it be a phone or a computer, then you gotta pay to actually be connected to the internet, and then it's fucking riddled with ads, with various sites going "hey pay us money and they'll go away"


I'm not sure that's a sustainable future for generating income for folks on the internet.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Trigg3rH4ppy posted...

If we ever have to stop using an adblocker here I'm posting screen caps of every porn ad I get on the Pokémon boards.

You must look at a lot of porn. The ads are based on your web surfing.

I really don't even get porn ads I was just being edgy. I would get ads for suboxone because I used to be addicted to pain pills and I was googling stuff about withdrawal techniques a lot. They seem like they've calmed down though because I've been clean from that shit for a few years now so I don't really do much research unless I'm volunteering at the clinic.
---

No

We have the right to not see what we don't want to see

Especially with the danger of malware and annoying ads that should not exist

But it can be unethical if you're watching your favorite content creator and you're not supporting them at all
---

No.

The most convincing argument for me is that you should not be forced to receive certain data on your own computer and connection that you've paid for, especially when that data can be (and often is) malicious and especially when it eats up your bandwidth (several Megabytes worth on some sites).

Now, if it leads to creators not being able to support themselves and having to charge money up front (or do something else we might not like), then you can't really complain (as much). That's the risk you / we take.

Basically, consumers are free to do what they want (within reason), but that naturally applies to creators also.

If the system in which ads is put up in the first place was nice looking and not intrusive, I wouldn't block.

However, they basically are as obnoxious as possible and ruin the experience of that website often. No thanks
---

Not in the slightest.
---

bump
---

bump
---

Fuck ads. They are infuriating.
---