More and more people are using software to turn off irritating website advertisements – but without them, smaller sites might go under
www.theguardian.com
&
You may well argue, “if using an ad blocker removes obtrusive ads, increases privacy and saves your precious data, then how could that possibly be a bad thing?”
As it turns out, ad blocking’s detractors have some compelling arguments.
Opponents of ad blocking argue that ad blocking
contributes to the death of independent media by removing the only model of revenue available for internet publishers to maintain their sites and pay wages. Publishers, embattled by the shift in emphasis from print and television to digital news making and storytelling, have yet to find sufficient replacement revenue models to maintain their businesses. As ad blocking continues to gain in popularity, publishers continue to lose advertising revenue and therefore the resources they need to pay for quality, independent journalism, which, as was argued at the aforementioned conferences we attended, is necessary for an informed populace and for democracy to thrive.
A recent study conducted by Pagefair and Adobe showed that there are close to 200 million internet users worldwide with an ad blocker installed and the figure is actually highest in Europe with 77 million. Of European countries, Greece has the highest rate of ad blocking in the region at 37% of users.
As ad blocking grew by 41% in the last year to account for over $20 billion in lost revenue in 2015, Pagefair predicts that this may rise to over $40 billion in 2016. So our apparent enthusiasm for blocking ads is beginning to match our enthusiasm for viewing great content, which arguably cannot exist without the ads.
Many detractors of ad blocking also argue that by viewing online content, users are entering into an ‘implied moral contract’ with the publisher; that by agreeing to view the content, you are also agreeing to view the advertising that pays for it.