I mentioned a while back that I was giving the web browser Firefox a try as a replacement for Windows Internet Explorer. I’ve been using it ever since, but wasn’t really convinced it was better than IE until the other day when some of the guys at the Quarter to Three forums told me a few things that propelled Firefox to the top.
Two things were revealed about Firefox that instantly made my ‘net surfing much more enjoyable. First is the FlashClick plugin that doesn’t play flash ads unless you click on them. Second was instructions (in the thread) on how to have Firefox play an animated .gif file once and then stop. These two things, along with the built-in popup killer, make Foxfire far better than IE.
Heck, look at the screenshots below. On the left is GameSpy.com as seen through Internet Explorer. On the right is the same site through Firefox with the settings described above. Click through each to have a good look. Now, to complete the experience, imagine that the one on the left has advertisements that move, make sounds, and generally get on your nerves, while the one on the right does nothing of the sort.
 |
 |
Quite a difference, eh? I can now surf in peace again. (I don’t, by the way, mean to pick on my friends at GameSpy.com. It’s just that they’ve gone and made themselves one of the most illustrative examples I could find.)
Of course, this raises an ethical conundrum as well. By blocking the popup, flash, and animated .gif ads on the sites I visit, am I “stealing” their content? For that matter, is it wrong to use TiVo to fast forward through television commercials? Having been on the other side of the fence for no short period of time, I appreciate the fact that advertising pays the bills and allows sites to put up content that doesn’t cost me anything except some of my patience. So, do I feel bad about cheating the system in this way?
Answer: No, not really. Advertisers are the ones who pushed things too far by putting up crap that got so annoying that it drove me to actively seek out ways to get around it. I still see unobtrusive ads (banners, skyscraper ads, rectangular ads) and I can still view the Flash ads by clicking on them. And besides, they’re still getting “credit” for serving the obnoxious stuff to me –Foxfire is a client-side program that doesn’t nuke anything until it’s rendered (or not) on my end. And since I never clicked on any of the ads in the first place, things are no different than before I started blocking the ads. Except, of course, that I can actually enjoy these sites enough to visit them regularly.
Want to see an example of web advertising done really well? Check out the “Uniform” short feature on the American Express website, which features Jerry Seinfeld and Superman. I just watched a four minute commercial for American Express and at the end I wanted more!
So, if you think online advertising has gotten unbearable, give Firefox a try with the FlashClick plugin installed. If you don’t like it better, I’ll eat a bug.
I might have to try it. I one time could not look at cnn.com for an entire day because they had an ad which spun around and made me motion sick. I almost threw up! The stupid thing did not just do it once but kept spinning the whole time you were on the site.
I prefer Avant Browser, a tab-based (w00t) browser that uses IE’s rendering engine.
http://www.avantbrowser.com
Please eat that bug now, foolish bet-maker. Can I choose the species?
Firefox has tabs too, but they’re optional. Personally, I don’t like them because I want to see what web pages I have open in my task bar.
And the bet was for whether you’d like Firefox better than IE. SO NO BUG EATING FOR YOU!
Also, didn’t know that you had a Livejournal, Ben. Consider it bookmarked.
Och. Must have tabs. Can’t survive without them.
The LJ is a new thang. Seeing how it works out. I used to be anti-blog, but I think they’re OK now, so long as you’re sensible about what you post in ’em. Nothing torrid. And no gerbiling stories.
“Answer: No, not really.”
Bzzzzt. Of course you are stealing! Your excuse is just an attempt to rationalize what you know is wrong. Same argument those who steal music via P2P apps. Yes, you’re being ripped off with ridiculous CD prices but you’re still stealing.
Do I do the same thing? Of course! I’m an unapologetic blocker-of-pop-ups. (I haven’t, however, dloaded music since coming to work at GameSpy.)
Tungsten, I haxored your comment above to the right thread. Movable Type needs an option to move comments from one story to another.
Anyway, I was talking more about whether or not I feel bad about using ad blockers, not whether or not it’s stealing. But even still, I’m not convinced it is. Downloading music (or movies, or games, etc.) is obviously stealing, assuming it’s not put up for free. You’re getting a copy of something that the owners want you to pay for.
But in the case of ad blocking, that’s not true. Nobody wanted me to pay for that content, and as I said in the OP, they’re still getting credit for the impressions. If blocking the ads in this way is stealing, then so is just ignoring them. So is changing the TV channel when those annoying Quizno’s ads comes on.
Unless, of course, you’re putting “not paying with attention or time” in the same category of behaviors as “not paying with money”, in which case yeah, sure. Stealing. But I hardly see them as equivalent.
If there’s a problem with any of this, it’s more to do with the classic commons dilemma –if everyone starts doing it, the whole system collapses Or adapts. I’m hoping for the “adapts” outcome. 🙂
Oops. Maybe MT 3 will have that feature.
“if everyone starts doing it, the whole system collapses Or adapts. I’m hoping for the ‘adapts’ outcome. :)”
We all wish for such a bright future. I think if all sites offered explicitly said “You’ll pay by looking at ads or you’ll pay with a subscription.” this would be much more clear. Instead we’re forced into civil disobedience.
T
Since when is blocking ads considered “civil disobediance?”
Once the bits and bytes cross that invisible threshold where the cable ends and the-area-that-is-my-house begins, those bits and bytes are mine to fuck with. Provided, of course, those bits are not encrypted specifically for someone else’s use (i.e. an encrypted satellite or cable signal), and iffen I don’t re-broadcast them in a profit-seeking enterprise, those bits are mine, mine, mine.
So, since the bits that make up the ads are mine once they trip on through the door, I am perfectly within my rights to apply any technology I see fit to kill them outright once they show their hairy little faces.
The general content of this post is disgusting,anyone hear of the INDUCE act by Sen Orrin Hatch?its an intellectual property(theft) protection act.a couple years ago he headlined as sponsor of a bill legalizing malicious hacking if applied in protection of IP.Well the INDUCE act would make it illegal to ‘induce’ customers into skipping adverts on tv,ie it would outlaw the only unique feature tivo has.And I don’t know about everyone else but I pay for my cable television,and I still get advertisements!Tell me,if you register on gamespy do you get less ads?I thought as much…the same applies to paying for tv-remember mtv a decade and a half ago?have you seen it lately?Its only the webmaster’s fault if people Adblock their revenue generating ads,webmasters that tolerate flash ads with looping sounds bring the loss of revenue on themselves and their sites.In the end the only people hurt by these flash ads will be IE users and the advertisers themselves,who will quickly find people moving to block EVERY form of advertisement.Is this going overboard? probably…but since neither macromedia nor microsoft want to address it people will take their browsers into their own hands,block flash and even adserving domains,ESPECIALLY the abusers (doubleclick i’m looking at you!)
btw,i know this thread is old,and Adblock is currently the best adblocker around,with the ability to filter by keyword(those VIAGRA ads bugging ya?:) and domain