Garacesh Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 BBC News - Google launches ad-free net experiment Google has unveiled a project that offers web users the option to pay to visit sites rather than see adverts. Dubbed Contributor, users can pay a monthly fee of between $1 to $3 for ad-free sites. When those who have paid their subscriptions visit a participating site they will see pixelated patterns replacing the adverts. Personally I think they're entirely missing the point. I don't care about adverts. I care about invasive adverts. Popups, auto-play-with-sound, discreetly placed close/mute buttons. I whitelist sites I use often that display non-invasive adverts, such as Edugeek, Imgur, Reddit and others. I don't whitelist pseudo-news and such. I think the web needs to find a better money-raising model. The vast majority of people rarely click ads. Once or twice I'll see something and think "Ooh, that looks interesting." and give it a click but 99% of the time if I want something I go looking for it myself through the likes of Google/Amazon/eBay etc. Ads just aren't too effective in this era of the digital age.
JRowley Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 Don't really care about it for general web browsing, but seriously wish they would implement a similar model as twitch when it comes to YouTube.
Garacesh Posted November 24, 2014 Author Posted November 24, 2014 And what's that? I don't really use Twitch.
localzuk Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 And what's that? I don't really use Twitch. You can pay for "Turbo", which is a monthly sub. It disables all adverts, site-wide.
Miscbrah Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 It's VERY simple, good Google folks. - Get targeted ad or see banner ad. - Click on, visit site. - Leave site, then DELIBERATELY buy from competitor, even if it costs a little more. - Within a year, advertisers die of hunger. - ???? - Profit (not for advertisers.) OR try and get the silliest targeted ads you can just to collect them week to week. I'm SO BADLY trying to get an organ-enhancement targeted ad but there ain't none and I have one colourful Google history now.
JRowley Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 There are basically two systems, Turbo user and individual subscriptions. A Turbo user gets pretty much no ads at all (I think there is one exception) and a few other benefits. But the individual subscriptions are more interesting as you subscribe to a specific channel, they then get half the subscription fee ($5/mon) so you can more directly support them, you don't see ads this way either. I would prefer Google added both, but the individual subscriptions is the one I would like to see the most, as money goes straight to the channel.
Nibiru Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 The advertisers have ruined it for themselves what with intrusive pop up, pop under & noisy adverts. On our v slow bb at home I found the adverts noticably slowed down page loadings - to several seconds on some sites This is when I discovered ad blockers. And Google have missed the boat - anyone can do it for free with a few clicks and an add on.
localzuk Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 There are basically two systems, Turbo user and individual subscriptions. A Turbo user gets pretty much no ads at all (I think there is one exception) and a few other benefits. But the individual subscriptions are more interesting as you subscribe to a specific channel, they then get half the subscription fee ($5/mon) so you can more directly support them, you don't see ads this way either. Not all individual subscriptions are ad-free. Only "older" subs (ie. if they were partnered and got the sub button before May 2013). Also, the amount the broadcaster gets isn't fixed at half any more - it is negotiated on a case by case basis - I think many will still be half/half, but the big subs/networks will obviously have more clout when negotiating.
Garacesh Posted November 24, 2014 Author Posted November 24, 2014 (edited) You can pay for "Turbo", which is a monthly sub. It disables all adverts, site-wide. Sounds like any basic ad-free 'account upgrade' paywall. Nothing special there. - Leave site, then DELIBERATELY buy from competitor, even if it costs a little more. What, even if it's a product I don't want or need? Also, to be fair, practically every service advertises in one way or another.. So the competitors would have ads too. I really don't have a problem with an ad if it's unobtrusive and relevant. And no, by relevant I don't mean use tracking cookies to target ads. I mean relevant to the site I'm on. If I'm browsing Overclockers, give me ads from ASUS, NVidia etc. If I then start checking out movies, throw ads for Netflix/Amazon streaming my way. Chances are, even if I need a new PC part, I'm not going to click on a PC-based advert if I'm reading the news. Edited November 24, 2014 by Garacesh
JRowley Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 Not all individual subscriptions are ad-free. Only "older" subs (ie. if they were partnered and got the sub button before May 2013). Also, the amount the broadcaster gets isn't fixed at half any more - it is negotiated on a case by case basis - I think many will still be half/half, but the big subs/networks will obviously have more clout when negotiating. Regardless, this is still the model that I would like to see Google adopt for YouTube, it's better than nothing at all.
jamesb Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 I tend to use Adblock plus, with whitelisting turned on for non-intrusive adverts. Although it isn't really the adverts that bother me - it's the tracking and profiling.
IrritableTech Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 I tend to use Adblock plus, with whitelisting turned on for non-intrusive adverts. Although it isn't really the adverts that bother me - it's the tracking and profiling. Yeah - if you want to pay up and go ad free, you'll need to be signed into google 24/7 on every device...
LincolnE Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 I've been using Adblock Plus for godknows how long now. I do whitelist some sites, however.
difinity Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 I tend to use Adblock plus, with whitelisting turned on for non-intrusive adverts. Although it isn't really the adverts that bother me - it's the tracking and profiling. Take a look at Ghostery if you don't use it already. https://www.ghostery.com/
LiamH Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) Adblock, scriptsafe, and flashblock tend to deal with most of the issues. I do whitelist sites however (edugeek is whitelisted) Edited November 25, 2014 by LiamH
rich_tech Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 I have been using adblock plus for aeons with Firefox/Chrome now blocking everything regardless, its intrusive to my browsing experience being targetted, I also tend to sky+ everything and skip through adverts. I was gutted the other day when the gmail app I had used for years started having a "Promoted" ad at the top of my promotions page when sorting mail, I switched to another mail program on the iphone moments later. Mobile phones now are infuriating too because you can't switch that c*** off on them.
windowsman Posted November 29, 2014 Posted November 29, 2014 Depending on the amount of ad's, if it was on a general website (e.g. Google), and all you see is the Google Ad's, then no I wouldn't. But, if this was a opportunity for more ad's to be added to websites which you NEED, then probably.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now