Re: ad-blocking software

From: John Gaskill <gm_at_info-central-usa.com>
Date: Wed 22 Mar 2000 14:08:21 +0000

FRED SHOWKER WROTE:
> Does anyone else agree with another poster's belief
> that:
>
> > If the content "quality" of the advertiser
> > supported "free" sites is such that people are
> > unwilling to pay to receive it (either via watching
> > ads or through subscriptions) those sites will fade
> > into black. And that will tell if there was really
> > any quality there to begin with.
>
> Is this statement true?

This statement is one of opinion and just as likely to
to be true as some of those you make.

Suppose a site depends on "advertiser support" to pay
the bills, and that support goes away. Then the site
faces closure and it must then decide whether or not to
subsidize its own operation (either out of the
operator's pockets; by charging admission or
"membership," or by asking for contributions -- e.g.
the public radio/television model).

Unlike people, web sites cannot live on love alone,
they require money support.

> Something in this belief doesn't quite ring true.

Only if mischaracterized as a law of the internet.

The belief is quite true in that it does not deny the
existence of "ad free" sites, nor does it deny users
who visit sites the right to strip ads and save their
time. The belief recognizes that there is a race
between the safe makers and the safe crackers
and this situation is no different.

Someone will reverse-engineer the ad stripping
software and sell a program to site operators
who want all their ads to be seen.

Those who still want to visit the site will do so.
Those who want "ad free viewing" will go elsewhere.

> I review 50 to 100 submitted sites each month.
> Many, many have superb content but no ads.
>
> I don't think you can make a blanket statement that if
> internet surfers use "Ad Blocking Software" then the
> content-driven sites will shut down.

No such statement has been put forth. A hysterical
reaction that half the web would go away but
serious observers know that isn't likely.

> This "Numbing" of the internet user is causing surfers
> to find no-charge, no-ads sites to get their
> information from as opposed to the spam sites. This,
> in the long run will have a more negative effect on
> the web than the spam-blocking software.

In fact, this is a wholly false and misleading
assertion.

When web users can get a direct line on the information
they want with little or no advertising, they save
their time and open up common bandwidth. That
bandwidth can be used by creative and ingenious web
advertisers and their agencies to provide internet ads
which are more entertainment than spam. An analogous
situation is Budweiser and the lizards.

Things change.

On the internet, things change much faster than they do
in the non-virtual world. Better get used to it and
come up with a way to make ads that serve the customer
and advertiser, not just the delivery medium and ad
agency.

If people want to see your ads, they won't bother with
ad-stripping software. Just be sure you are putting
those ads in the right places to begin with.

Regards all,

John Gaskill
gm_at_info-central-usa.com
Info-Central (sm)
We make life easier (sm)
http://www.info-central-usa.com

==================================================================
Want more business? More site hits? A bigger audience?
Try something new --> http://www.info-central-usa.com/newmedia.htm
==================================================================






Received on Wed Mar 22 2000 - 08:08:21 CST