Thursday, 13 September 2007

So the Adblock saga that's been rumbling along for a while is finally reaching a peak, with people cottoning on to the fact that it's potentially (in theory) damaging to the very revenue streams that make the Web 2.0 world so tasty, supple and pliant. So much so that you've even got mechanisms for sites to block Adblock-enabled Firefox browsers.

This is a bit nuts, no? To me it smacks of classic internet kneejerkery. Where's the evidence that all these bottom lines are being eroded? There isn't any - this is all supposition and FUD at the moment.

Adblock, and browser plugins like it, came about because web advertising had become so intrusive, disruptive and unruly that the hacker community came up with a solution. You very rarely hear anyone bitching about Google Adsense ads, as they're both textual and usefully contextual, and anyone who wants to argue that 200Kb Flash movies choking my bandwidth and sprouting both alongside, above and directly over the content users are trying to access is in any way a good idea needs their head thoroughly scrutinised. The very existence of adblocking tools should be sending a very clear message to web advertising companies - we don't want to be beaten over the head with your shit. Plus, do you really want to be engaging in a incremental bunfight with the hacker community, either side progressively defeating the other's measures? Is it really a good use of everyone's time?

No comments:

Post a Comment