Web Advertising Shit
23 Feb 2024
There is an industry lash-out against "ad-blockers."
Of course there is. For Websites tell us that they need advertising to stay in business, subterfuge for "we want to make money from users simply viewing our shit."
Websites want to make money. Okay. Fine.
I have been watching television and reading newspapers and magazines all my life – and still do – and all have been and are still advertiser supported. That is fine. That's the way is... was. But the Internet is now different.
I remember the beginning of the Internet (and it's "Capital I", okay?). Adverts were there at the start, too. First as text "links" then as image links. Again, that was just plain how it was done. But the Internet is now different.
Today, "ads" are not passive images to instill curiosity in a product, service or location, about which a reader made an active choice to look into what was shown to them. Today, "ads" are the faces of the corporate surveillance industry, tracking every user's traffic on the entire Internet, following everywhere one goes. Everywhere.
This industry is reading your mail, listening in on your radio, watching your TV shows along with you. They own your movements and whereabouts. They know what you are watching and they know when you are awake...
And there is no way to "opt-out." And those who do not want to be so surveilled have no option but to use third-party tools called "blockers."
Many people who simply want to be "not tracked". And many, like me, are stuck using low-bandwidth Internet connections were hundreds of ten megabyte sized transfers per website is horrendously slow and the cause of connectivity errors.
Let's make this one thing clear now: The argument that "A website makes it's rules for access that you should abide by," is disingenuous. For when I visit any big-box store's website, I visit a dozen other websites at the same time. Such behind the scenes interactively borders on fraud.
When one visits a website one accepts it's "Terms of service." Okay, fine. I accept that. That is the argument, but, to reiterate, what about all the other behind the scenes websites that it connects to on you behalf?
Any argument that I do not have any right to control, or to even have any say, about such interactivity, when they do not disclose such interconnections is an argument for abdicating all your rights to all corporations one the entire Internet.
Any argument that I do not have any right to control, or to even have any say, about such interactivity, means that when I buy something I do not only have to agree to that manufacturer's terms but also have to agree to all manufacturers, producers, distributers that enable that purchase to have occurred.
Shall we also be obligated to adhere of all related non-disclosure, arbitration agreements? Every legal or quasi-legal "paper" between them all?
Are all ordinary citizens now without rights at all?
Such arguments are preposterous...
The Real World
The present, real world of "advertising" is like these images from Britannica. Visit their website and you see 3 to 4 totally unrelated to content/context "ads" per screen. Okay, near 50-50 content to ads is probably average or typical. Here is screen one and 2 about 4 seconds later:
And then about 8 and 12 seconds later:
That is 11 to 16 advertisements per that one screen as you read it's content.
And un-seen here is that most of the ads are video ads, playing – sometimes with audio – while you read. That is a content to ads ratio far beyond 50-50...
The content to advertisement ratio is now far beyond comprehension and perhaps sanity, as a typical "news feed" screen shows:
That is 8 rolling, changing advertisements taking up 90% of the screen content while forcing the viewer to "click" to continue, with each page click just another "request" for more of the same.
Interspersed with "content" are "ads" indistinguishable from ads but for about 64 x 64 bit image or two off to a corner.
Anyone advocating that users should put up with this – let alone be obligated, legally required, to put up with this – is an absurd person making an absurd case on behalf of his absurd corporate Edgelord.
As I have said, I read, listen to and watch media with advertising. That is fine – as long as the advertisements are passive and not corporate surveillances of my every move and click.
When advertisements go back to passive images and links, I will uninstall my web-blockers. Not before.
These fucking things are more and more frequent:
They are blatant lies, with the latter just plain obnoxious shit. First, they do not serve ads, they pay for services that track your every webpage view. Advertisements, good, "old fashioned" ones, that I have always respected, were always content based, meaning, related to the subject at hand. For instance, reading a Camping magazine I'd see camping related advertisements which were all very much of my interest, while reading that magazine. That is actually a good thing. Or was.
Internet ads are no such thing.
Internet ads are a billion dollar income corporate tool to fleece the public – you. But, and here is the important part, Internet ads are a fucking con with the marks the websites relying on those "ads" for their "existence". Google and Amazon make billions of dollars while the websites shilling for them make tens of dollars... That is, the websites make a pittence of "treats" from their corpo overlords who make BILLIONS off of those website's own "Users"!
Websites like Howtogeek are simple shills for corpo edgelords who make massive amounts of dollars because of shit like this:
<link rel="preconnect" href="https://www.google-analytics.com"> <script defer src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-PVR2ZX9X91"></script>
Every time you visit Howtogeek you are visiting Google. Every time you visit Howtogeek you are are being tracked by Google. Websites like Howtogeek don't make money by you clicking Internet ads, wesites like Howtogeek make money BY YOU VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. Of fucking course they do not want you to "block ads".