Nice write up. This is certainly something I think of as a problem.
webprofessor
· 2 years ago
David Google Adsense is one of the easiest advertising forms to block with adblocking software. You simply block the domain they serve it google adsense from. I haven't seen an Adsense block in ages since I installed AdBlocker.
David Vogelpohl
· 2 years ago
Webprofessor,
I agree Adsense is one of the easiest forms to block; however, Adsense clones designed in HTML would be harder to block. The point I was trying to make was that text based ads would be one strategy to avoid ad blocking software. Adsense specifically would not be a good option if this were your goal.
Thanks, David
Tom
· 2 years ago
So it's the end users fault that the advertisers are using an obnoxious and poorly recieved method of ad distribution and getting little bang for their buck?
If people generally dislike this particular form of advertising, why not listen to them?
David Vogelpohl
· 2 years ago
Tom,
The great thing about advertising is that it's a self regulating entity. If users don't like specific types of ads they can either not click on the link or not visit the site where the ad is displayed.
I agree that publishers and advertisers should experiment with their ad designs to best fit the users' desires.
Most ad blocking software doesn't take into account the quality of ads, but rather blocks all ads of a certain type (Flash for example).
If an advertiser has a poorly performing ad or if a publisher includes ads which overly detract from the quality of their site, then market forces will dictate that the ad or site will change or perish.
Circumventing advertising for the sake of circumventing advertising is a little different than arguing over the quality of specific ads or sites.
My other point is that publishers will find a way to monetize their sites one way or the other, and in an environment where obvious forms of advertising are blocked publishers may elect to use less obvious forms of advertising which may not be beneficial to the web (i.e. pay per post).
HMTKSteve
· 2 years ago
The hardest form of advertising to block is also the best; direct ad sales between the web site and the advertiser.
I just started selling 125x125 button ads on my site. Because these images are served from the same server as my content and content images blocking them will also result in blocking my content. I would like to think my visitors come to my site for my content so I do not think they will block my image directory just to avoid a few small button ads.
Because I sell these via direct sales I do not have to worry about some third party putting an annoying flash ad into my banner roation or on my site at all. Due to recent things Google has been doing I am finding them to be a very unreliable service in regards to AdSense.
I also use Pay-Per-Post but most of the offers listed on the site are either outside of the area of my readers interest or do not pay enough.
Mark Barrera
· 2 years ago
I am just now researching more into ad blocking software and was curious about something. On a CPM campaign, if the ad isn't shown, wouldn't it be correct that you won't pay for an impression? And for pay per action/click ads, you wouldn't be losing money either.
The only thing you are losing is audience size. If the audience doesn't want ads anyways, then it seems that ad blocking works to your advantage by allowing you to not spend on consumers who wouldn't buy or be influenced in the first place.
HMTKSteve
· 2 years ago
Mark,
Adblocking does help the advertiser in a CPM situation, why pay for an impression if the reader will never even look at your ad? As for CPC, are you looking at CPC as a CPM campaign that costs less because you get "free" impressions of your ad?
Either way it is not the advertisers who are crying about adblocking it is the websites that generate income from readers having ads served to them that are doing the crying.
David Vogelpohl
· 2 years ago
Mark,
This is true and this is something I considered when writing this article. The only thing I would point out here is that some people may be influenced by others to install ad blocking software.
The few people who have approached me about this did so in a way as to convince me to install the software. There is going to be some element of the audience who might have responded to advertising yet were influenced by others to block ads.
Mark Barrera
· 2 years ago
@Steve - Being a publisher, I should have thought about that. I guess I am wearing the agency hat today and am fighting for the advertisers ;)
@David - Great point. I guess we will have to watch how big the efforts to promote these products gets to see how we need to adjust our advertising techniques.
Andy Beal
· 2 years ago
@David - great article!
webprofessor
· 2 years ago
@HMTKSteve - Its easy to block those types of image ads too. You just block common banner sizes ( can't do this with adblock but I think Norton has a tool to do it ) and common names for advertising. The only real way to get advertising that isn't block is to actually use regular text links that go directly to the target.
webprofessor
· 2 years ago
How to detect adblocking? You simply use a javascript that checks your DOM for the ads you use. If you can't detect the ads in your DOM or they have been altered to be invisible then you don't display your page.
Jake
· 2 years ago
As I've written before - there is a good chance adblocking is actually unconstitutional.... I'm glad higher traffic sites are finally expanding on my original view.
webprofessor
· 2 years ago
unconstitional? lol..
what amendment do you think is being broken?
Jake
· 2 years ago
1st Amendment which through tried cases is meant to assume "The liberty to create, possess and disseminate information without hindrance....".
Thats retarded. Free speech rights only applies to how the government treats us not what private citizens do. If I want to go through the Sunday paper and cut out all the ads before I read it I can. If I want to kick you off my lawn while you wave signs up I can. If I want to remove ads from a page I downloaded onto my computer in the privacy of my home.... guess what.. thats right I can.
Marketers can rant about this all they want but what they really should be doing is being creative with their marketing and not make enemies out of their audience.
Joeychgo
· 2 years ago
the constitution only applies to the us government and its agents.
Bidding Wel Directory
· 2 years ago
Great article, agree with you!
Tom
· 2 years ago
If anything actually comes from these proposed lawsuits, I think people will just start sharing information on how to block ads manually. Taking steps like updating your hosts file to block content from certain domains/locations, disabling javascript, etc... aren't very hard to do to begin with.
Advertisers got themselves into this mess with overly aggressive banner ads, flash ads, etc... with little consideration for the end user. Just because you *can* make an obnoxious flash ad that overlays the content of a page, plays music and animation, and is difficult to close - doesn't mean you should, or the user will appreciate it.
This kind of backlash was inevitable.
no ads
· 1 year ago
if ad blocking makes people who can use words like "monetize" in a non-ironic fashion lose a little sleep, then I think it makes the world a better place
All Comments
I agree Adsense is one of the easiest forms to block; however, Adsense clones designed in HTML would be harder to block. The point I was trying to make was that text based ads would be one strategy to avoid ad blocking software. Adsense specifically would not be a good option if this were your goal.
Thanks,
David
If people generally dislike this particular form of advertising, why not listen to them?
The great thing about advertising is that it's a self regulating entity. If users don't like specific types of ads they can either not click on the link or not visit the site where the ad is displayed.
I agree that publishers and advertisers should experiment with their ad designs to best fit the users' desires.
Most ad blocking software doesn't take into account the quality of ads, but rather blocks all ads of a certain type (Flash for example).
If an advertiser has a poorly performing ad or if a publisher includes ads which overly detract from the quality of their site, then market forces will dictate that the ad or site will change or perish.
Circumventing advertising for the sake of circumventing advertising is a little different than arguing over the quality of specific ads or sites.
My other point is that publishers will find a way to monetize their sites one way or the other, and in an environment where obvious forms of advertising are blocked publishers may elect to use less obvious forms of advertising which may not be beneficial to the web (i.e. pay per post).
I just started selling 125x125 button ads on my site. Because these images are served from the same server as my content and content images blocking them will also result in blocking my content. I would like to think my visitors come to my site for my content so I do not think they will block my image directory just to avoid a few small button ads.
Because I sell these via direct sales I do not have to worry about some third party putting an annoying flash ad into my banner roation or on my site at all. Due to recent things Google has been doing I am finding them to be a very unreliable service in regards to AdSense.
I also use Pay-Per-Post but most of the offers listed on the site are either outside of the area of my readers interest or do not pay enough.
And for pay per action/click ads, you wouldn't be losing money either.
The only thing you are losing is audience size. If the audience doesn't want ads anyways, then it seems that ad blocking works to your advantage by allowing you to not spend on consumers who wouldn't buy or be influenced in the first place.
Adblocking does help the advertiser in a CPM situation, why pay for an impression if the reader will never even look at your ad? As for CPC, are you looking at CPC as a CPM campaign that costs less because you get "free" impressions of your ad?
Either way it is not the advertisers who are crying about adblocking it is the websites that generate income from readers having ads served to them that are doing the crying.
This is true and this is something I considered when writing this article. The only thing I would point out here is that some people may be influenced by others to install ad blocking software.
The few people who have approached me about this did so in a way as to convince me to install the software. There is going to be some element of the audience who might have responded to advertising yet were influenced by others to block ads.
@David - Great point. I guess we will have to watch how big the efforts to promote these products gets to see how we need to adjust our advertising techniques.
what amendment do you think is being broken?
Read it here:
http://www.blockfirefox.com/Home/tabid/36/Entry...
Marketers can rant about this all they want but what they really should be doing is being creative with their marketing and not make enemies out of their audience.
Advertisers got themselves into this mess with overly aggressive banner ads, flash ads, etc... with little consideration for the end user. Just because you *can* make an obnoxious flash ad that overlays the content of a page, plays music and animation, and is difficult to close - doesn't mean you should, or the user will appreciate it.
This kind of backlash was inevitable.