Every so often, I find myself forced to use the Web on a browser
without uBlock or an equivalent; and every time, I think to myself “How
do people live like this?” The un-ad-blocked web is a miserable cesspool
of autoplaying video and hysterical calls to action, slow to load, hard
to look at. It’s even worse on your phone, where ads devour your
battery life and
up to 75% of your data.
Apple, to their credit, supports ad blockers for Mobile Safari. But
Google? Yeah, not so much. You can run a separate browser, such as
Brave. You can run through a proxy, or reset your DNS to use an ad blocker like
Optimal.
But you can’t just add an ad blocker to Chrome for Android. Surprising
that a company with Google’s technical chops hasn’t made that possible
yet.
…Or maybe it isn’t so surprising. After all, most of Google’s money
comes from display and search ads. Perhaps relatedly, Apple also makes
it pretty easy to change DNS settings on iOS: it’s a much bigger pain on
Android, whether via the Wi-Fi settings or
programmatically.
The fundamental problem is that users hate ads but sites need ad
money. The most interesting initiatives in the ad-blocking world are the
two I mentioned above, Brave and Optimal, because both are trying to
attack this root problem.
Brave
replaces “bad ads” with “good ads” that don’t track or annoy users,
with a long-game eye on replacing ad revenue with micropayments.
Optimal wants to replace ad revenue with subscription payments shared across all sites that Optimal’s users visit.
Ad blocking have become a big enough deal to have gotten Facebook’s attention: the social giant is now
blocking ad blockers, while promising to make the ads their users see nicer. As Josh Constine
puts it, “Facebook thinks if it can make its ads non-interruptive, fast, and secure, people won’t mind.”
Now, this has attracted a lot of amused skepticism:
and indeed an arms race has
ensued. But I think Facebook is at least halfway right about this. Today’s ad ecosystem suffers from two fundamental problems:
- Ads are bad.
- Advertising is terrible.
Bad ads are the ones which drain your battery and data. They are the
pop-ups and pop-unders. They are the trackers and supercookies. They are
the Outbrain and Taboola clickbait at the bottom of articles published
by otherwise respectable media.
But even ads which are not bad are still terrible. People who are
paid by advertising, one way or another, inevitably wind up
rationalizing that ads are somehow good for people, that they like
seeing ads as long as they match their demographic and interests, etc
etc ad nauseum.
I cannot stress enough that this is not true. People
hate ads;
it’s just a matter of degree. We hate commercial breaks. We hate
display ads. We hate billboards. We live with them, because we have no
alternative, but we hate them — and ad blockers have taught us that
online, we
do have an alternative. We don’t have to see them at
all. Replacing “bad ads” with “not so bad ads” does not make the
fundamental concept of advertising any more palatable.
There are rare exceptions to this rule, of course. Movie trailers are
ads, but we don’t hate them — quite the contrary. We don’t much hate
search ads, because they
only appear when we are actively looking for something:
this is one major reason that Google is a gigantic money-making
machine. Similarly, for the same reason, we don’t hate the “People who
bought this also bought” ads on Amazon.
(Even ads that would otherwise be appealing — eg Apple’s gorgeous
“Shot on iPhone 6S” posters — can become hateful; not in and of
themselves, but because they’re part of the ever-accumulating background
of advertising, the ongoing transactionalization of our entire public
sphere. No advertiser has any incentive to cut back, so advertising
in toto
overwhelms us to the point that we are, on some deep level, numbed and
disgusted by it all. Call it a tragedy of the cultural commons. This is
what Facebook wants to prevent — but despite its best intentions, I fear
that well has already been poisoned by advertising elsewhere.)
Will eliminating bad online ads cause people to forget that
advertising is terrible, and lapse back into our learned helplessness? I
hope not. A subscription-based automatic-micropayment solution is a
better way, I think, and Brave and Optimal are taking steps in that
direction. On one hand, I’m not optimistic that we can get to that
better world from the current one any time soon; on the other, though,
in the long run, doing things your customers hate is always, ultimately,
a bad strategy.
Right now that’s a moot point. In the short term, the important thing
is that Apple, Brave, Optimal, Facebook, and many others are hammering
home the point that “bad ads” are becoming less and less acceptable. The
online advertising ecosystem is, I hope, heading for a ruinous
collapse. Organizations which continue to use bad ads will ultimately
suffer for it, and some will die, sooner or later. Let’s hope it’s
sooner.
Comments
Post a Comment
Welcome.......
What are you thinking of....!!