> The IAB's new group working on the problem will convene its first meeting next week, aiming to study and experiment with responses including a more clutter-free web experience, strict guidelines for the data that ads traffic in...
Even were the IAB to strictly prohibit trafficking in all tracking data, I would never trust any policy that says, in effect, "trust us, we're IAB and we won't track you, wink, wink". First, only a small subset of all Internet advertisers will hold themselves to IAB's standards (and like any cartel or wannabe cartel, members will defect). More importantly, advertisers and ad networks have proven themselves to be completely untrustworthy.
The Internet is a wild place, and ad networks carry the most dangerous threats the average user will encounter. Ad blocking is, most importantly, a means to protect ourselves. The superior user experience is a nice side effect.
I don't understand the mentality that says "the person I'm trying to reach has blocked me, so I will subvert the method they are using to force them to view my ad." Isn't the whole point of an ad to persuade someone to buy your product? Why would anyone think this hostile approach would achieve that?
> we have gone a little bit overboard on the advertising
Quite an understatement.
I will repeat myself: visible ads are the tip of the tracking/data-mining iceberg. Not seeing ads is not a sign that a site is more respectful of its visitors.
Found a pretty good example of this earlier today. See how there are no visible ads on the page, it looks rather clean, and yet see the amount of 3rd parties being pulled into the page[1]:
The IAB will lose horrifically. It will be worse than wack-a-mole, similar to the music industry's futile attempts to keep its jurassic-world business models on life support, like battling unsophisticated malware or like the battle social networks have with keeping bots and fake profiles from taking over their MAU numbers.
What the Ad industry needs is a completely new and innovative business/revenue model, one that has not been thought of before. On the bright side, it's the dawn of a AdAge!
The Adblockers will lose horrifically. It will be worse than wack-a-mole, similar to the file-sharing industry's futile attempts to keep music free and shareable...
I now pay more per month for music than I did at any other time in my life, and I am becoming locked in to paying more per month forever. The music industry has won, they've replaced their old business model with one that costs us more while they take less risk.
Some people really dislike the idea of ads. They install adblockers. Publishers who make their living from ads respond. Who has more motivation, those who are vaguely annoyed, or those who lose their jobs and companies if they fail? The latter, of course. They will find a way around this because they have everything to lose.
I dislike the IAB, it's a force against progress within the ad business. But they're not going to lose horrifically, and even if they lose slightly it won't mean that you have won, just like with music.
Really depends, do they want to track people who are using ad blockers so they have numbers? Because that is a pretty important goal.
Or do they want to track people who are using ad blockers so they can nag and bully them into disabling their ad blockers? Because that will end badly. People will eventually develop browsers which render 2 versions of the page, one showing showing ads that provides all results to javascript and css queries and one which has all ads removed for the user.
If that happens, they will lose any metrics they have on who is blocking ads.
From the article: "Part of the problem is as an industry we have gone a little bit overboard on the advertising," said Rick Jaworski, CEO at JoyOfBaking.com, during a main-stage session with Mr. Rothenberg designed to publicize the plight of publishers. "For myself, when I go to a lot of sites these days, i'm irritated and I want an ad blocker."
So even people who speak at ad exec conferences use ad blockers.
"... renewed promotion of the industry's AdChoices program, which aims to give consumers some control over their digital experience."
The site says:
"Welcome to Your AdChoices, where you're in control of your Internet experience with interest-based advertising—ads that are intended for you, based on what you do online."
This isn't an alternative to adblocking - it's pretty much the opposite og adblocking.
I want to write a browser extension that automatically clicks all ads seen, loads the page in a hidden tab, and closes it.
It would be pretty painful for the online ad markets, as their effectiveness rates could easily be cut in half with a dozen people on their site that click every ad without viewing the results. So few people interact with ads, that a small cohort of 100% active users would overwhelm data with noise.
But, in the short term, you'd be supporting all the websites you browse until advertisers discover a way to filter out your false clicks.
Pretty sure that when you have to wadge a battle against obvious technology to justify your business model, your industry is going to end up on the wrong side of history.
[+] [-] npongratz|10 years ago|reply
> The IAB's new group working on the problem will convene its first meeting next week, aiming to study and experiment with responses including a more clutter-free web experience, strict guidelines for the data that ads traffic in...
Even were the IAB to strictly prohibit trafficking in all tracking data, I would never trust any policy that says, in effect, "trust us, we're IAB and we won't track you, wink, wink". First, only a small subset of all Internet advertisers will hold themselves to IAB's standards (and like any cartel or wannabe cartel, members will defect). More importantly, advertisers and ad networks have proven themselves to be completely untrustworthy.
The Internet is a wild place, and ad networks carry the most dangerous threats the average user will encounter. Ad blocking is, most importantly, a means to protect ourselves. The superior user experience is a nice side effect.
[+] [-] navbaker|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bduerst|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gorhill|10 years ago|reply
Quite an understatement.
I will repeat myself: visible ads are the tip of the tracking/data-mining iceberg. Not seeing ads is not a sign that a site is more respectful of its visitors.
Found a pretty good example of this earlier today. See how there are no visible ads on the page, it looks rather clean, and yet see the amount of 3rd parties being pulled into the page[1]:
https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/585534/10198746/6...
[1] this is the result of temporarily whitelisting the site to be able to see what it pulls in without a blocker.
[+] [-] meeper16|10 years ago|reply
What the Ad industry needs is a completely new and innovative business/revenue model, one that has not been thought of before. On the bright side, it's the dawn of a AdAge!
[+] [-] ganeumann|10 years ago|reply
The Adblockers will lose horrifically. It will be worse than wack-a-mole, similar to the file-sharing industry's futile attempts to keep music free and shareable...
I now pay more per month for music than I did at any other time in my life, and I am becoming locked in to paying more per month forever. The music industry has won, they've replaced their old business model with one that costs us more while they take less risk.
Some people really dislike the idea of ads. They install adblockers. Publishers who make their living from ads respond. Who has more motivation, those who are vaguely annoyed, or those who lose their jobs and companies if they fail? The latter, of course. They will find a way around this because they have everything to lose.
I dislike the IAB, it's a force against progress within the ad business. But they're not going to lose horrifically, and even if they lose slightly it won't mean that you have won, just like with music.
[+] [-] phire|10 years ago|reply
Or do they want to track people who are using ad blockers so they can nag and bully them into disabling their ad blockers? Because that will end badly. People will eventually develop browsers which render 2 versions of the page, one showing showing ads that provides all results to javascript and css queries and one which has all ads removed for the user.
If that happens, they will lose any metrics they have on who is blocking ads.
[+] [-] protomyth|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Animats|10 years ago|reply
So even people who speak at ad exec conferences use ad blockers.
[+] [-] yummybear|10 years ago|reply
The site says:
"Welcome to Your AdChoices, where you're in control of your Internet experience with interest-based advertising—ads that are intended for you, based on what you do online."
This isn't an alternative to adblocking - it's pretty much the opposite og adblocking.
[+] [-] cwkoss|10 years ago|reply
It would be pretty painful for the online ad markets, as their effectiveness rates could easily be cut in half with a dozen people on their site that click every ad without viewing the results. So few people interact with ads, that a small cohort of 100% active users would overwhelm data with noise.
But, in the short term, you'd be supporting all the websites you browse until advertisers discover a way to filter out your false clicks.
[+] [-] greglindahl|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nomadlogic|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Hoasi|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rdunham3|10 years ago|reply
Also, an ad never knowingly requested by a user constitutes theft of (Internet) service, so the whole ad industry by definition are law-breakers.