Hello everyone,

There's been a lot of brouhaha recently about the proliferation of ad blockers, in both web and mobile contexts.  The short version is, advertisers, app developers, and site owners are not happy with consumers making use of ad blocking software to, in their view 'steal content normally paid for by advertising'.  That sounds just barely reasonable, on the face of things.  However, as a long-time user of ad blockers on all devices that will support them, I call the most strident of shenanigans on this outlook.

Let's consider a purely online context - websites, online games, et cetera.  Participating in any sort of online exchange requires a minimum of two separate entry fees: one must own an online-capable device (one-time fee), then pay for a connection (ongoing fee).  Ignoring, for now, the original purpose of the Internet (the exchange of information, in a largely non-commercial fashion), that seems reasonable.  After all, we purchase physical goods, pay people wages as employees, pay taxes, pay for entertainment, et cetera.  It's not a stretch, then, that content producers will expect some manner of compensation for what they have to offer.  I have no issue with asking for a just exchange of money for content.

My time and attention are valuable; I only have a certain amount of time and energy during the day, and what I choose to direct it toward, clearly, is a choice I need to make.  If that happens to be content someone else has produced, and they would like to be paid, so be it - that is reasonable, and I'm sure we can make a rational exchange for that.  This is the crux of commercial exchange - my money for your goods and services.  I maintain control over what I see, and what I direct my money toward.  The problem arises when intermediaries hijack the process.  It turns out, attention is so valuable, that other people will pay to get it, no matter what they have to do.  The producer sees the potential of new revenue streams, with the promise of more income for barely more work, and understandably jumps on it.  Advertisers specialize in bidding for attention, in the form of online screen-space, audio/video, consumer tracking...

And this is where a rational value exchange breaks down.  It is no longer my money for your goods - it is a grab for my attention, via a small concession of your own (if that), and perhaps that might have remained a fair deal, if it weren't for the abhorrent methods that advertisers use.  There should be no contention that the relevance of advertising has dropped sharply as more get involved, huge advertising conglomerates and services promising pay-per-click, in exchange for giving them rein of a small portion of your presence.  And there arises a new problem: you have effectively ceded control over the exchange of value.  Your customers are not yours any more, and what gets shown to them is not up to you.  To make matters worse, with others compromising advertising networks, you are now actively removing value, to say nothing about the effects of so many ads on the performance of the user experience.

Further to that last point, with the glut of advertising frameworks, tracking mechanisms, and audio/video presentations, is it any surprise that consumers choose to block ads?  Advertisers are effectively stealing from consumers in some respects.  Not everyone has unmetered connections - so when ads consume the majority of the data being shuttled back and forth, what kind of value does it really have to the consumer?  When advertising causes devices to consume so much more power (mobile devices especially), who pays for that increased consumption?  You sure won't see advertisers reimbursing extra utility costs or data overrages.

To be fair, some advertisers have recognized the royally fucked-up position they find themselves in.  Let's hope this is the start of something better.

We could get into a whole bunch of rights and entitlement issues here, too, but I'll simply say this:
It is your right to offer your content at an exchange of value you deem fit.  It is my right to accept or decline that offer.
It is your right to involve anyone you choose, advertisers included.  It is my right to refuse entry to our value exchange, up to and including blocking insecure and bloated advertising.
It is your right to offer 'free' content.  It is my right to call bullshit on 'free'.
It is your right to offer no free content at all.  It is my right to go elsewhere.

Go ahead - remove your content, that's certainly your right.  Or, you know what might be a better idea?  Take back control of your part of the exchange.  Take your presence back, choose who you want to involve, and give your customers, your subscribers, your audience some respect.  If I, as a consumer, can't verify who is involved, can't trust that our transaction is of value to both of us, I have no interest in continuing our relationship.

I produce content, too.  I offer it for free.  I pay the expenses associated with maintaining this presence.  If there ever comes a day that my content, this site, takes on advertising, please make sure I am okay - it will be a cold day in hell before I allow that to happen.  I fully support ad blocking and will cheer for it with every bit of energy I have.

That's all for now.