its 100% free…
Comodo GhostRank with a twist?
First off, I fully understand that advertising is what funds much of the Internet. The problem, IMO of course, is the way in which websites and advertisers choose to present their ads. When I’m searching for content the very last thing I want to find on any page is around 40% (or more) of the screen space taken up with glaring, often flashing, high coloured adverts. I realise they’re trying to attract my attention but the way they deliver their adverts severely impacts what I’m trying to read. You don’t encourage someone to buy your product by bashing them over the head with a big stick, nor do you do so with an ugly, intrusive, flashing advert.
It’s as though 40% of my TV screen was covered in glaring, flashing adverts and the show I’m trying to watch was squeezed up one side. Nobody would stand for that in a TV programme so why do we have to put up with it on the Internet?
It’s not the people running adblockers who are the problem, it’s the way adverts are designed and presented that’s the problem. It’s also true that in the entire time I’ve been a web user (and I’m 64 years old with a lifetime spent in computing and IT) I have never bought anything advertised on a web page.
One reason I’ve never bought anything from a web advert is because I never click on suspect links, so I’m certainly not going to click on a glaring, flashing advert for an unknown product from an unknown company on an unknown website. How can I possibly know whether it’s legitimate? IMO a major part of staying safe online is being very careful about what it is that you click on. How can anyone possibly tell whether an advert is real or spoofed? The best defence is never to click on them, and that defeats their whole purpose.
It seems to me Melih that your adblock tracker is approaching the problem from the wrong end. Clearly people use adblockers because the current advertising methodology is way too intrusive and also potentially insecure. Yet your service is designed to allow site providers to keep delivering adverts in a form that we don’t want to see, for products we probably never buy, and in a way that makes us wary of clicking on the links.
And on top of all that, many people (me included) object to being tracked and targeted in order to deliver adverts that somebody thinks I might be interested in. In my case at least all that technology is wasted because I’m never going to click on any advert link on web pages that I’ve found via a search. It’s neither safe nor wise to do so. I might (only might, mind you) go and visit the website of a company whose advert has pricked my interest, but click on one on an unknown web page? Never. And by the way, in order to ■■■■■ my interest you have to be subtle with your advert and subtlety is sadly missing from most web adverts.
A more sensible, and sustainable, approach would be to find out why people use adblockers in the first place. I don’t object to adverts on web pages, I object to intrusive adverts on web pages, too many adverts on web pages, and links that I cannot trust. A more subtle form of advertising and one where I could have confidence that the code and link behind the advert is safe would be much more acceptable, to me at least and I suspect a great many others.
I don’t think the answer to funding the web is to target adblockers. You’ll just start an arms race where the adblockers will seek to defeat your logging. In any case, adblockers are not the problem, they a response to the REAL problem and that is the manner in which advertising is done on the Internet.
You are 100% right. its wild wild west out there. All these ad networks and publishers going crazy with ads. This is why I have built AdSanitizer as a product…its ads tamed, with user being in full control…ads are controlled by us…not the publishers…but publisher still make money…win-win for users and publishers…