Solutions to revenue loss from Adblocking - for publishers

Adblocking - comments

Very difficult to give a logical answer on this one. I use Adblock, and find it very good. The only ads I am prepared to accept, are on sites that are very important to me. In the UK there are 2 sites that give live share prices, without paying a subscription. The basic free version is enough for me, although I would have to pay if no alternative.

What really annoys me, are sites that somehow fill the whole screen, and I know older folk who find this very difficult to get rid of. They do not want to CTRL ALT DEL and use taskmanager. These sites give the whole industry a bad name, and I will never use sites that do this.

 

a growing problem, i agree. there is a growing irrition by publishers if they detect that you are using an ad-blocker nowadays; they have finally woken up to the problem that they are missing income if you do. they only have themselves to blame, if you ask me, by using intrusive popups, supercookies, and what have you.
there is no solution. if you visit a newspaper site using an adblocker, like telegraaf.nl, their solution is a popup notification that you do, explaining that the site is free because of the ads. and block the content until you switch it off. when i know that they will, i leave.and avoid that site, in future. there are always newssites that the tolerate adblockers.and i just cant be bothered to switch off the blocker. there are more fish in the sea, after all. one solution may be to have really good content, and stop using supercookies. the fact is, that adblockers are here to stay. too bad for the publishers,but like i said, they only have temselves to blame. i would not dream of switching off my adblocker, the morale; speaking strictly for myself, i am afraid that i have little to offer in the way of solutions to your interesting problem..

 

I'll answer your question with a question: Are you involved in creating mechanisms to help "publishers" force more ads down our throats by bypassing adblocking technology?

 

SuperCookie

Not familiar with this phrase. Is that what I am describing as blocking the whole screen?

Lot of useful information in your answer. I too have come across sites that ban adblockers, and will only subscribe if absolutely critical to me. I am prepared to donate to Wikipedia and Audacity, who both provide stuff of real quality. As I UK TV licence payer I already help to pay for the BBC Website, which provides most of what I need news wise.

 

no, sites that use ads usually use cookies that do not expire, and allow them to follow your browsing the web. flashplayer is an example, they use *.sol instead of *.txt foor cookies; and that does not get killed by ccleaner, for instance. typically they are in a macromedia directory.

 

You need to login to view this posts content.

 

Thanks for your help. You will probably guess what my next question is. I do not want these unauthorized sol files on my PC.
I use CCleaner, and it is worrying to hear that it does not detect them. I did a search using Everything - which I find miles better than the Microsoft search.
*.sol just showed a few files in AppData\Local\Google\Chrome which are I presume are cookies that I have authorized Chrome to keep ???

Sorry if this is in the wrong section - maybe Mods could move it - please do not delete, as I am now learning a lot from the above posters - many thanks

 

@MrX123: Welcome to MDL.

Perhaps the mods can move this over to serious discussion?

 

you re welcome; fast solution; if you use firefox; install plug-in called better privacy; it will kill sol.files without trouble. and welcome at mdl, btw!

 

Or you can run a simple batch file to delete them. Your file locations might be different, so YMMV.

Spoiler

:This gets rid of the .sol files
rd "C:\Users\UserName\AppData\Roaming\Macromedia\Flash Player\#SharedObjects" /s /q
rd "C:\Users\UserName\AppData\Roaming\Macromedia\Flash Player\macromedia.com\support\flashplayer\sys" /s /q

:This removes IE files
rd "C:\Users\UserName\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5" /s /q
rd "C:\Users\UserName\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\History\History.IE5" /s /q
del "C:\Users\UserName\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Cookies\*.* /s /q

If you are using FireFox you can configure it to delete all coolies whenever FireFox closes.

 

I don 't need ads, for what it's worth - but when I do, I stop my uBlock and Ghostery in FireFox. Then, I see ads I want to see...

To me, if they try to force something on me, like Noddy, I leave... and do not come back!

 

Agreed on all points.

And I take it one step further. Any web site that blocks access because I'm using an Ad Blocker I locate the "Contact Us" link and send them this picture.

 

I hate these Adds and cookies more so the ones that follow you around the web, i installed firefox add on Better Privacy in november 2014 and the total of super cookies .sol that it has deleted is
20983 I just minimise it to the tray and it dose it job of deleting the super cookies from all my browsers.

 

@ palladin; @echo|y del. saves a keystroke, i think.

 

Make the ads less intrusive. Any site with auto-playing videos or making sound I didn't expect instantly goes on my never-visit-again list.

 

Another obvious question now. I still want to use Chrome, so is there an equivalent for the Firefox plugin better privacy?
Maybe Chrome does not allow privacy? I use Chrome because it genuinely works better for me. Especially the translate facility. I use Baidu a lot, and the Google Translate works better. Chrome also seems to find stuff that IE or Bing simply does not show (unless they are being blocked without me knowing).
At the risk of sounding like a Google Groupie I had to use their online spreadsheet to do something that Excel could not do. The syntax was identical, except for one function that took me half a day to work out.

 

You need to login to view this posts content.

 

You need to login to view this posts content.

 

thanks, mods, good that this thread was moved. btw; i see that the original thread starter never even looked at what he started...i suspect we will not see any feedback..