Why you MUST not use an ad blocker - unless you want to pay for content

[tavelkyosoba]

TV doesn;t ban you for using tivo does it?

Point won.

That's a fair point, but take it to the extreme. If everyone started using Tivo to skip ads, eventually advertisers would catch on, stop paying the studios and bam, no more content.

So until someone comes up with a genius idea that lets publishers get paid and consumers watch for free, some of us that watch adverts get to be the only ones who do, to make sure the advertisers pay for the content we enjoy, while others block them and enjoy the content for free anyway?

Jeez, that sounds fair.

I think a lot of people have been spoiled by the amount of free content on the web, and they forget that because of the commercial success of the Internet, that it's evolved into a media marketplace where people post their own intellectual properties as a service, NOT for free.

It is fair. The market is driven by the actions of individuals. If you don't like something, don't buy it. Don't feel compelled to buy it because you feel bad for the guy.

If you don't like malicious or even just annoying ads, don't watch them. It's not your responsibility to provide income to the provider...it's the provider's responsibility to innovate.

You don't owe them anything. They don't owe us anything...but they want money, and they need to do a song and dance to get it from us. Not the other way around.

Edit: I'm not opposed to advertisements on a fundamental level. I do actually like some ads because they make me aware of products and services that interest me (OMG like that's totally the purpose of an ad!)

I don't like irrelevant ads, hulu fixes this by having you rate the ads they show you.

I don't like annoying ads, the mute button fixes that.

I don't like ads malicious ads that strong-arm you into watching (like the guy below pointed out) or that give viruses and other goodies.

Adblock fixes that.

 

[mr_rubino]

I don't have an ad blocker, but I'm starting to consider it.
I frequent a site that is affiliated with Blip.tv.
You used to be able to just click the ad, and it'd end, the site would get the money, and everyone was happy. Not anymore.
You used to be able to pause the ads. Not anymore.
There used to be just an ad at the beginning. Not anymore. Combined with the last two, good luck trying to concentrate for that 30 seconds or so after a video ends.

 

[Jinjiro]

It is fair. The market is driven by the actions of individuals. If you don't like something, don't buy it. Don't feel compelled to buy it because you feel bad for the guy.

If you don't like malicious or even just annoying ads, don't watch them. It's not your responsibility to provide income to the provider...it's the provider's responsibility to innovate.

You don't owe them anything. They don't owe us anything...but they want money, and they need to do a song and dance to get it from us. Not the other way around.

Edit: I'm not opposed to advertisements on a fundamental level. I do actually like some ads because they make me aware of products and services that interest me (OMG like that's totally the purpose of an ad!)

I don't like irrelevant ads, hulu fixes this by having you rate the ads they show you.

I don't like annoying ads, the mute button fixes that.

I don't like ads malicious ads that strong-arm you into watching (like the guy below pointed out) or that give viruses and other goodies.

Adblock fixes that.

I'm fairly sure making a web series that comes out every week for our entertainment qualifies as a 'song and dance' as you put it.

If showing our support for a series we like means putting up with an ad or two, then fine. I think it's snobbish and selfish to assume you can watch something that a team has worked hard on for free. What, are we all anti-capitalists now? Or does everyone feel we should be paying for content ourselves? I'd really love to know which is the case.

And seriously with the malware thing, it's not the adverts themselves, it's the delivery platforms like FimServe or DoubleClick that they use. SQL injection/XSS is probably at the heart of most of those advert-related problems. Christ, half a year or so ago you were vulnerable to SQL attacks through anything that used Adobe Flash.

 

[bdcjacko]

You know, after i read this and felt bad for not supporting the site, I go an get the premium pub club membership. 20 minutes later I get put on probation for discussing this topic. I give the Escapist 20 bucks for the privilege of being on probation. That is some top quality bs right there.

 

[ender214]

The thing is that ad-blocking, an act that seems relatively simple, isn't used by many because they simply don't know how. Thus they watch the ads, the website gets revenue, and I don't have to.

Now, I know someone is going to respond to that with "Well, if everybody thought that way, then it wouldn't work." Well, if everyone decided to become a doctor, then it wouldn't be a very profitable profession would it? Fact of the matter is, not everyone will be able to think that way, because not everyone has the knowledge to act upon it.

 

[vanslashington]

Hi.
There are some problems with simply asking/telling people to stop blocking the ads.

As any intelligent person knows, if just ONE person refuses to watch the ads, it really won't do any damage to the industry. A couple cents, at most. And this is true. If it were just one person doing it, there would be no harm. So we all think (yes, we) "...why shouldn't that one person be me?"

And there's no logical answer for that question. You add in 2 or 3 more people, and there's still no damage done. But once you have thousands of people doing it, then forcing that ONE person to watch the ads won't help at all.

The only way to make people watch the ads (assuming they are not enjoyable enough to watch by one's own free will) is either to hope that they will ALL go against their better judgment, and think that their watching will actually make a difference, or you're going to have to force them to watch the ads somehow, if they want to view the content.

 

[Wolfenbarg]

snip

snip

Compensate creators?

You choose to host files publicly on the internet.

This is like painting on a wall and then asking people to pay for your brushes. You created the content before people can pay for it, its a risky situation.

Compensation and profit are two different things. Artists do not deserve to be compensated, as they are making something as the purpose. Contributors deserve to be compensated as it reflects people like them and that they want them to continue. People using ad blockers are therefore not supporting your work. So what? So, having ruled out the idea that you guys are artists, you're looking for profit, not compensation.

This dashes away any high horse mentality you could hold. You want to make money and you're annoyed people aren't letting you. Refusing to pay for merch? What the hell are you talking about. If they refuse to pay its because they don't want it. If they want it and don't pay they don't get it. Yeesh, they're not doing anything wrong by not buying everything advertisers tell them. What are they stealing exactly? What is it?

Thirdly can I just point out that people blocking ads aren;t necessarily doing anything bad for you from a business standpoint.

Everytime an ad gets viewed it shuffles along the cue. People using ad block clearly are not going to click on the ad. So, if these people do not use ad block, then the ads disappear faster and the advertisers get less traffic from it. Encouraging them to stop advertising with you. Do you have a response to this?

What a bunch of self entitled drivel. This isn't painting on a wall on a public street. That's what they USED to do back when their troupe started their little business. Now their content is licensed by a popular distributor and they get paid for their work. People who refuse to watch their ads are basically refusing to pay them for what they do. This isn't a 'risky business model that they deserve to suffer for. You and everyone else here are watching content that wouldn't even exist if they couldn't do it professionally.

Second of all, artists don't deserve to be compensated? What kind of bullcrap is this? So artists aren't allowed to be professionals that get paid to do what they love? What kind of crap is it that in this world where a plumber can be paid to render a service because he enjoys doing it and a comedian, musician, painter etc shouldn't? They are NOT doing this for profit. LRR started 7 years ago putting everything up completely for free when they had the time to make videos. Their first grand achievement was 5000 views and being featured on someone else's website. Not only this, but at least 3 LRR crew members have jobs on the side, two of those being desk jobs. Despite that they STILL are producing content for this website. They're just asking to be paid for their work, not paid for nothing.

Oh no, they want to make money for more than 40 hours of work a week producing three web series for the escapist and managing their own website that hosts forums, podcasts, another separate video series that makes videos three times a week instead of just once, and a huge charity event on top of that? How dare they! And how dare you and anyone else demand to be paid for something they spend their lives doing for a living.

Yes they are. The Escapist provides them with a minimal budget, then the rest of the money the Escapist and the video producers here make are off of ad revenue. Ad blocking ruins their CPM, so you really are keeping them from making money.

At this point, there is no business model that video content creators can use that still makes them a profit. If that was the case, Youtube, blip.tv, Hulu, Revver, the Escapist and every other video website would use it instead of using ads. This isn't just people on youtube, and you people need to learn the distinction.

 

[Jinjiro]

As long as the site stays up, I lose nothing by others gain. Which is to say it doesn't negatively impact on me that they don't have shittiness. So I personally have no vested interest in supporting the sites views.

Personally, the newer shows seem to be the crappiest/cheapest. Extra Credits, Movie Bob, IHIWMA, Daily Drop and Rebecca Mayes are all low budget and shaky in their consistency. So I have little incentive to support the direction the site is taking or the need for more money.

That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but you don't have the right to expect the Escapist magazine or any series or articles you DO watch and enjoy to stay up sans-funding. Until some better idea comes along, that funding comes from adverts. If you don't enjoy the site enough to put up with the adverts that fund it, then you shouldn't be here. Hence the suspensions/bans for using AdBlock.

I'm sure out there in the WWW there's some altruistic folks that do stuff for free, and while I respect that, I'm more a fan of seeing talented and creative people get paid and not have to get a day-job to support themselves.

I genuinely wish there was a better way of them getting paid, but right now this is the best we have, without us consumers having to pay from our own pockets.

Edit: Wolfenbarg said it better than I did in the post above.

 

[DigitalSushi]

Everybody that has Ad blocker, here is a handy guide which I suggest you follow and do with The Escapist
http://www.devcha.com/2007/08/how-to-disable-adblock-plus-or.html

Anybody condoning or promoting Adblocking software or plugins on this site will receive Mod Wrath.

Edit: You don't have to click the ad for it to register, its called page views and using Ad Blocking plugins will stop that View, this site needs you to view the adverts.

~ColdStorage

 

[tigermilk]

My problem with threads like this is while the OP and a number of responses make coherent points The Escapists policy of suspending peoples accounts if they admit to using an ad blocker unless they pay the $20 a year subscription means that conversation as to the use of ad blockers has to be strictly hypothetical. As opposed to drawing on empirical arguments (if you use an adblocker but aren't a premium subscriber).

 

[Lady Kathleen]

Compensate creators?

You choose to host files publicly on the internet.

This is like painting on a wall and then asking people to pay for your brushes. You created the content before people can pay for it, its a risky situation.

What you're saying is this: I paint a mural. You love to look at the mural, and you look at it every week. It brings a smile to your face. So I say, "hey, would you mind throwing a couple of bucks into my hat since you like my work so much?" and you respond with "fuck you, I can look at it for free because you painted it outside!"

Artists do not deserve to be compensated as they are making something as the purpose

Does this mean that doctors who became doctors because they wanted to heal the sick shouldn't be paid either? That's ridiculous. Art and money aren't exclusive. Artists don't cease to become artists when they seek compensation for their work. They become professional artists. The same way athletes become professional athletes when they get paid for their work (Olympians vs pro football players) People need to support themselves.

I doubt I will get through to you, you're clearly living in a world where art is meaningless, the Olympics are a waste of money, and doctor's only compensation should be the privilege of treating you.

 

[bdcjacko]

Compensate creators?

You choose to host files publicly on the internet.

This is like painting on a wall and then asking people to pay for your brushes. You created the content before people can pay for it, its a risky situation.

What you're saying is this: I paint a mural. You love to look at the mural, and you look at it every week. It brings a smile to your face. So I say, "hey, would you mind throwing a couple of bucks into my hat since you like my work so much?" and you respond with "fuck you, I can look at it for free because you painted it outside!"

Artists do not deserve to be compensated as they are making something as the purpose

Does this mean that doctors who became doctors because they wanted to heal the sick shouldn't be paid either? That's ridiculous. Art and money aren't exclusive. Artists don't cease to become artists when they seek compensation for their work. They become professional artists. The same way athletes become professional athletes when they get paid for their work (Olympians vs pro football players) People need to support themselves.

I doubt I will get through to you, you're clearly living in a world where art is meaningless, the Olympics are a waste of money, and doctor's only compensation should be the privilege of treating you.

Let me ask you, was this a trick to round up people with ad block despite the reasons they may have been using ad block?

 

[Romidude]

I just got a virus from an ad, crashed my computer and after I booted it up, it made it run slower than a calculator, time to download Ad Block Pro.

 

[Jinjiro]

Let me ask you, was this a trick to round up people with ad block despite the reasons they may have been using ad block?

That's really unfair, the original point was a valid one.

I just got a virus from an ad, crashed my computer and after I booted it up, it made it run slower than a calculator, time to download Ad Block Pro.

What malware protection are you running?

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

Everyone should just join the PubClub

It's cheaper to put up with the ads; personally I miss the ones advertising big boobs bras.

I agree with 100% of this post.

'scapist guys deserve teh monehz! Seriously, they do. I'd feel mean if I used an adblocker. Besides, Fable III is using T.Rex to advertise... yeah!!!

 

[bdcjacko]

Let me ask you, was this a trick to round up people with ad block despite the reasons they may have been using ad block?

That's really unfair, the original point was a valid one.

I just got a virus from an ad, crashed my computer and after I booted it up, it made it run slower than a calculator, time to download Ad Block Pro.

What malware protection are you running?

At work I'm running something called Panda anti-virus and I got a virus despite the program up-dating daily. After the virus was resolved they strongly urged me to using firefox because of the the ad-block. When I mentioned that and said I would gladly pay for entertainment, then went on to join pub club, I got a probation for explaining why I used an ad-block. I have since then discussed my frustartion for getting punished while doing the right thing and taken off probation. But I'm still irritated by it. And it does seem like a witch hunt to punish people when they have legit reason and aren't out to rip off the escapist.

 

[Delusibeta]

And now, let's put the cart in front of the horse.

Spotted a blog post that said, essentually, encouraging people to disable their ad-blockers is stealing from advertisers. [http://www.pcgamingstandards.com/Blog.aspx?blogid=11] Go forth and pick holes.

(Talking about putting the cart in front of the horse, my current adverts on this page: The Escapist Store and Extra Credits. Huh.)

 

[Jinjiro]

At work I'm running something called Panda anti-virus + *snip*

If it's a personal computer you use there, get either AVG, NOD32 or commonsense Anti-Virus, and if you use Firefox I strongly recommend getting the NoScript addon. At first it'll seem annoying, but once you allow scripts for all your favourite/regular sites like The Escapist or Youtube or whatever, it's really the best protection Firefox has to offer from malware and cross site scripting especially.

Sorry to go off-topic!