eBay

joe_bloggs* · ‎02-03-2016

Adblocking companies acting as a “modern-day protection racket” have been slammed by culture secretary John Whittingdale...

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/mar/02/adblocking-protection-racket-john-whittingdale

the comments after the article are worth a read

We are many,They are few

bankhaunter · ‎09-03-2016

So if I'm giving a political speech in the street, no one is allowed to shut their windows so they can't hear me.

If a person is phoning you, their voice is invading your home, don't people have any right to decide what they hear in their own home?

If you pick up the phone, realise it is a political message, can you not just put the phone down?

Can they not turn off the television if a party political broadcast is about to start?

Does a person not have the right to decide what they want pushed through their letterbox?

___________________________________________________________
Parents of young, organic life forms are warned that towels can be harmful if swallowed in large quantities.

upthecreekyetagain · ‎10-03-2016

All of the examples you give are ones of exercising the right not to listen - exactly the same as someone on an Underground escalator looking straight ahead and not looking at the adverts on the wall.

You have the same right to read a newspaper and not look at the adverts, you do not have the right to demand to be supplied a paper where the adverts have been blanked out.

Deno thread on FHG

bankhaunter · ‎10-03-2016

But you choose to buy a paper knowing it has adverts in it.

How can the right not to listen exist if the phone rings, you pick it up and the first thing you hear is a political message.

If there is no right to block such messages, there is no right to block any calls, such as ones who don't disclose their number for example.

___________________________________________________________
Parents of young, organic life forms are warned that towels can be harmful if swallowed in large quantities.

upthecreekyetagain · ‎10-03-2016

You do have the right not to listen to messages on your phone - you gave examples of how to do this in your earlier post

Deno thread on FHG

bankhaunter · ‎10-03-2016

But there is no way you can pick up the phone and not hear something.

Does a political party have a greater right to freedom of speech than a company advertising their product?

Personally I consider political advertising to be the same as any other form of unwanted spam and see no good reason why it cannot be treated as such.

___________________________________________________________
Parents of young, organic life forms are warned that towels can be harmful if swallowed in large quantities.

upthecreekyetagain · ‎10-03-2016

Neither do I - I think the US argument over political cold calling is on shaky ground - the argument over using adblockers on sites however is a totally different argument.

Deno thread on FHG

cee-dee · ‎10-03-2016

Is it? Isn't adblocking only concerned with what you receive, it's not interfering with the websites concerned and that being so, surely you can choose what you receive?

Those sites that slap up a big message saying they've detected you're using an adblocker and/or refuse access to their site is surely counter-productive as, I for one just go elsewhere and it's those sites who're trying to blackmail the user by demanding you whitelist them before they'll let you in to their site?

It's life Jim, but not as WE know it.
Live long and prosper.

bankhaunter · ‎10-03-2016

Some sites have interesting content and do rely on advertising for any income, where it is non intrusive, I'm happy to turn the blocker off

The odd small advert doesn't bother me, it's when they have videos and flashing banners, I find it annoying.

___________________________________________________________
Parents of young, organic life forms are warned that towels can be harmful if swallowed in large quantities.

upthecreekyetagain · ‎10-03-2016

Many sites offer to display their content advert free on payment of a fee. More and more popular sites will no doubt take this stance. Akin to 'free' apps displaying adverts which can be used without the adverts on payment of a fee.

If if a site which prevents you seeing their content with an active ad-blocker makes you leave then that is hardly counter-productive for the site concerned. Your leaving doesn't use up their bandwidth and server overheads - they've not lost anything by you not staying on their site.

Deno thread on FHG

upthecreekyetagain · ‎10-03-2016

I hate videos and flashing adverts as well Bank - videos are especially annoying on phones which are using a 'mobile data' connection.

Deno thread on FHG

cee-dee · ‎10-03-2016

They've lost any potential for getting over whatever message they had on their site!

It's life Jim, but not as WE know it.
Live long and prosper.

upthecreekyetagain · ‎10-03-2016

What sort of sites are you looking at?

Deno thread on FHG

al**bear · ‎11-03-2016

Here’s why the UK culture secretary is clueless on ad blocking

Calling ad blocking modern-day piracy is ridiculous. It isn’t modern-day piracy at all. It’s technology giving more power to the consumer and therefore forcing changes in the market.

When somebody pirates a piece of music or a film, that’s it. No money goes to anybody who had a hand in producing it, and you can’t monetise somebody listening to an MP3 on their laptop.

With ad blocking it’s completely different. People might block your main source of income, which is undeniably a problem, but you still have that audience and therefore you can still find other ways to monetise that audience