I read a blog post by Marco Arment on the ethics of ad-blocking, and while I generally enjoyed his post, it was his use of the term "ethics" that gave me pause. Is it really potentially unethical (i.e. morally wrong) to block an ad? I understand the consequence if every internet user were able to block ads 100% effectively might quickly lead to a very different internet, but is that wrong? The other day at a doctor's office, I thumbed through the ads of a People magazine so quickly, I effectively "blocked" them. If anything, the waste (IMHO) of paper in a magazine more ads than article was the offense there. I routinely mute my television and pay attention to some electronic device when commercials come on, and don't consider myself a monster for doing so.
So where is all this rambling going? I guess it's just I seem to be seeing more and more online discussion of the right and wrong, aka "ethics", of ad and tracker blocking, and I'm not seeing a moral dilemma here.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Mr_Lovette 1 point 3 points 4 points (+4|-1) ago
This is the right answer for me. I am not about to be forced into potentially receiving malware because the web host doesn't moderate their ads. Nor am I going to be blasted in the ears with auto play sound ads.
[–] G4 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
I die a little inside when Captcha's have video ads that have to play before the text is shown on the bottom of the video.
[–] Bitchrod 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
This is an important point, that some ads are actually security risks.