Google Contributor: Pay To Block Ads - InformationWeek

InformationWeek is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

IoT
IoT
Comments
Google Contributor: Pay To Block Ads
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
Laurianne
50%
50%
Laurianne,
User Rank: Author
11/21/2014 | 2:59:56 PM
Weigh in
What do you think, readers? Would you pay up to view your favorite sites sans ads?
Stratustician
50%
50%
Stratustician,
User Rank: Ninja
11/21/2014 | 3:34:19 PM
Re: Weigh in
Personally, I've gotten so used to ads that I really stop noticing them often.  Would I pay a small fee to have them completely removed?  Depends on the sites that are supported and if their ad placement actually impacts the site (you know those pesky pop-ups), but honestly, I think most of us have just passed that point where we almost expect ads on every site we visit.
driverlesssam
50%
50%
driverlesssam,
User Rank: Strategist
11/22/2014 | 8:46:12 AM
Sounds like extortion to me
"Extortion - Refraining from doing harm is sometimes euphemistically called protection. Extortion is commonly practiced byorganized crime groups."  (and Google in this case).
CVCS_info
50%
50%
CVCS_info,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/22/2014 | 9:26:52 AM
Where are we headed?
I have to wonder...where are we headed when we are expected to pay money so we won't be harrassed by advertisements. Exactly what kind of society are we living in?

Is the concept of "humanity" relevant anymore? From the messages I am bombarded with, it appears the answer is NO! The only thing that seems to counts is how much money can be extracted from us.

Just to mess with the "program", what do you think money is? Surprise, it is NOT what we are told.
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Author
11/22/2014 | 11:25:13 AM
Silliness
This is the same business model that the Net Neutrality activists are so scared of.

I...I... I don't get it.
Somedude8
50%
50%
Somedude8,
User Rank: Ninja
11/22/2014 | 12:09:59 PM
Whose ads?
Google serves ad.

User pays Google to not serve ad.

Sounds legit.
jastroff
50%
50%
jastroff,
User Rank: Ninja
11/22/2014 | 1:35:48 PM
Re: Sounds like extortion to me
>> But unlike traditional ad blockers, Google's Contributor doesn't block revenue to the websites. While it takes a small cut of your monthly fee, it divides the rest among the partner websites you visit -- giving you a cleaner browsing experience while still supporting your favorite websites.

 

So does the NY Times, etc. etc. get reimbursed for the flashy ads they are serving up that I now don't see? And if I bought something from one of those ads that I now don't see, how does that impact their revenue model?

Google, et. al. led the industry to the Ad business, and now says you don't have to see the ads. 

The company has gotten so big and rich it can pretty much do as it wants, even if it is a bad strategy.
Nemos
50%
50%
Nemos,
User Rank: Strategist
11/23/2014 | 9:43:53 AM
ADV
"Clearly, publisher sites are struggling to monetize with advertising, as banner ad rates become increasingly commoditized and fall,"

That is so true, and perhaps one of the biggest problems that many editors are facing today, therefore the users have been bombed with advertisements and the sites are not earning anything. I don't believe the Google solution will help to defuse the current situation, but I always have in mind that almost all the google services are free of charge because of the advertisement policy.
Nemos
50%
50%
Nemos,
User Rank: Strategist
11/23/2014 | 9:54:35 AM
Re: Whose ads?
Of course it is legal but it sounds a bit crazy at the same time. Have in mind that in same cases you can't recognize which is the content and which is the advertisement. From the other hand, as long most of the services from Google remain free of charges to the users I believe we can "tolerate" as users some strange policies as the above.
zaious
50%
50%
zaious,
User Rank: Ninja
11/23/2014 | 6:07:04 PM
In simple words
Sites need Ad revenue to survive. 'The Onion' will not survive if it does not get Ad revenue. Now, I do not want to see Annoying Ads in the site. I would like to pay 'The Onion' few bucks, and Google is now mediating the transaction.
               -This is what I understood. And, I have the freedom not to pay (and see the ads). Does not look very evil (and not very noble). It is just a business model.

Page 1 / 3   >   >>


2020 State of DevOps Report
2020 State of DevOps Report
Download this report today to learn more about the key tools and technologies being utilized, and how organizations deal with the cultural and process changes that DevOps brings. The report also examines the barriers organizations face, as well as the rewards from DevOps including faster application delivery, higher quality products, and quicker recovery from errors in production.
News
How COVID is Changing Technology Futures
Jessica Davis, Senior Editor, Enterprise Apps,  7/23/2020
Slideshows
10 Ways AI Is Transforming Enterprise Software
Cynthia Harvey, Freelance Journalist, InformationWeek,  7/13/2020
Commentary
IT Career Paths You May Not Have Considered
Lisa Morgan, Freelance Writer,  6/30/2020
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
Video
Current Issue
Special Report: Why Performance Testing is Crucial Today
This special report will help enterprises determine what they should expect from performance testing solutions and how to put them to work most efficiently. Get it today!
White Papers
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.
Sponsored Video
Flash Poll