I would feel guiltier, but as soon as I browse the web without it on, a world of obnoxious, loud, and plain unwanted ads actively block or distract me from the content I came onto the site for.
Now there are some small time sites I have on my safe list, because they have ads for stuff I would like and don't yank me by the scruff and rub my face in their god awful ads.
I don't feel guilty at all. I never gave these companies permission to use my personal data and browsing history to target ads at me, so I'm going to ignore them when they try. Plus, I have fundamental disagreements with the capitalist mindset of "buy buy buy, more more more!" There is no such thing as unlimited growth, and we need to stop treating the world like there is. The planet would be better off for it. If they really want me to buy their shit, they should tell me how they're helping the planet, reducing waste, making their products last longer so replacement waste is minimized and how they are helping their workers earn a living wage. Instead I get crap advertisements about walmart rollbacks.
And the money this is supposedly costing advertisers, is that real money or projected revenue? Because projected revenue was never theirs to begin with, and they shouldn't be counting that as a monetary loss.
Actually, chances are you have given those permissions. Ever sign up for pretty much anything Google (Namely installing Chrome or browsing while logged in to a Google (GMail) account)? Then you gave those permissions. With the installs of both of those you accept terms and conditions that Google AdSense (Which is used for a large majority of internet-based advertisements) is allowed to use your browsing history to personalize ads for your viewing experience.
I agree. I felt so guilty recently I tried turning adblock off and using the internet without it...and was constantly bombarded with video ads that ate up my bandwith and wouldn't shut up no matter what I did. I'm fine with ads for sites I really love, but I can't see how anyone who knows about adblock would willingly not have it at this point.
I kind of feel the same way about this. I've seen marketeers laughing on TV, being chosen by consumers to have the most annoying ads. All proud they say that this means that consumers remember the ad and that their goal was accomplished. On the internet it doesn't seem much different. No wonder people start looking for ways to block ads. They've been pushed around for far too long, because some (not all!) marketeers thought they had free play forever. And now the ones that do try to make it interesting for consumers and the websites that really do need the ad income are the victims here.
I agree. As long as web advertising in intrusive, distracting and spammy, people will continue to use adblock software, and that figure is only going to rise.
I would feel guiltier, but as soon as I browse the web without it on, a world of obnoxious, loud, and plain unwanted ads actively block or distract me from the content I came onto the site for.
Now there are some small time sites I have on my safe list, because they have ads for stuff I would like and don't yank me by the scruff and rub my face in their god awful ads.
I don't feel guilty at all. I never gave these companies permission to use my personal data and browsing history to target ads at me, so I'm going to ignore them when they try. Plus, I have fundamental disagreements with the capitalist mindset of "buy buy buy, more more more!" There is no such thing as unlimited growth, and we need to stop treating the world like there is. The planet would be better off for it. If they really want me to buy their shit, they should tell me how they're helping the planet, reducing waste, making their products last longer so replacement waste is minimized and how they are helping their workers earn a living wage. Instead I get crap advertisements about walmart rollbacks.
And the money this is supposedly costing advertisers, is that real money or projected revenue? Because projected revenue was never theirs to begin with, and they shouldn't be counting that as a monetary loss.
Actually, chances are you have given those permissions. Ever sign up for pretty much anything Google (Namely installing Chrome or browsing while logged in to a Google (GMail) account)? Then you gave those permissions. With the installs of both of those you accept terms and conditions that Google AdSense (Which is used for a large majority of internet-based advertisements) is allowed to use your browsing history to personalize ads for your viewing experience.
I agree. I felt so guilty recently I tried turning adblock off and using the internet without it...and was constantly bombarded with video ads that ate up my bandwith and wouldn't shut up no matter what I did. I'm fine with ads for sites I really love, but I can't see how anyone who knows about adblock would willingly not have it at this point.
I kind of feel the same way about this. I've seen marketeers laughing on TV, being chosen by consumers to have the most annoying ads. All proud they say that this means that consumers remember the ad and that their goal was accomplished. On the internet it doesn't seem much different. No wonder people start looking for ways to block ads. They've been pushed around for far too long, because some (not all!) marketeers thought they had free play forever. And now the ones that do try to make it interesting for consumers and the websites that really do need the ad income are the victims here.
I agree. As long as web advertising in intrusive, distracting and spammy, people will continue to use adblock software, and that figure is only going to rise.