Adblock Plus to Allow Independent Board to Decide Which Ads Are `Acceptable’

[jos]

Adblock Plus plans to allow an independent review board to determine whether ads qualify as “acceptable” and are allowed to pass through its filters. Currently, Adblock Plus allows ads from some 700 companies to pass through its filters by default, provided those ads meet its “acceptable ads” policy and aren’t too disruptive or intrusive to users. Eyeo has accepted payment from around 70 of those companies, including Google, Microsoft and Taboola, in exchange for including them in the acceptable ads program.'

 

Eyeo said it now plans to form an independent board to decide what does and does not constitute “acceptable” advertising. The board will include representatives from online publishers and media companies, marketers, advertising companies and consumers, an Eyeo spokesman said. It’s expected to be in place during the first half of 2016.

 

“Users determined the original criteria and can object in our forum to whitelisting proposals, but since we were the only ad blocker to offer such a compromise we have taken on a large role in the day-to-day maintenance of the criteria,” read a prepared statement by Till Faida, co-founder of Adblock Plus. “We have been looking for a way to make the Acceptable Ads program completely independent while also updating the criteria to evolve with changing forms of online advertising. An independent board solves both issues.”

 

 

 

This is good, the content makers will get paid due to ads and the users do not want to see annoying, distorted, shout at users, and are inappropriate to the sites on which they appear.

Source: http://www.wsj.com/articles/adblock-plus-to-allow-independent-board-to-decide-which-ads-are-acceptable-1443553201

[EChondo]

Already switched to UBlock and have been much happier. 

[PlayStation 2]

So pretty much any ad.

This was doomed to fail to begin with

[minibois]

That's bs.

 

Just what I expected, the big ad blocker sees money and goes for it.

Not using any AdBlock right now, because of this stupid bs.

[givingtnt]

adblock should open the add in a seperate window. then close it when its done (youtube) or after 15 seconds. so that peeps keep getting the money

[Misanthrope]

Actually this isn't good at all, it's a sort of quiet cop out to allow marketers to push through whatever they want: I guarantee this board will mostly be marketing people anyway.

 

Stupid move since anyone can just create and maintain another similar service, it's like an anti virus that decides "Oh we'll let someone else decide what's a threat" vs going for another anti virus that actually works, who's gonna go for the former? 

[TroubleKlef]

In other words it will be corrupt.

[WereCat]

Already switched to UBlock and have been much happier.

Never heard of that. I will give it a try.

I always used AdBlock Plus or Ghostery.

[Nineshadow]

Already switched to UBlock and have been much happier. 

µBlock is better, indeed.

[Nicodemus]

I switched to Ublock a while back, much better IMO.

[EChondo]

Never heard of that. I will give it a try.

I always used AdBlock Plus or Ghostery.

I'd recommend this one: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

 

There's uBlock from Chrisajoudi, but gorhill has "uBlock Origin", which is supposedly the original one, and also the most updated one. You can read the wiki page about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

ABP was dead the second they started to allow certain ads.  I've been using Ghostery and very satisfied with it, but it looks like some ads are getting through there lately too.  Only on YT though, so it'll hopefully be fixed with the next update. 

[dalekphalm]

adblock should open the add in a seperate window. then close it when its done (youtube) or after 15 seconds. so that peeps keep getting the money

That would be a terrible system.

 

Do you think companies would be happy about paying ad revenue that is literally being hidden from the consumer? If you, the consumer, want the website you're visiting to still get paid via ad-revenue, then whitelist them, and look at the damn ads.

 

No ifs, ands, or buts about it, as they say.

[Zah]

I'd recommend this one: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

 

There's uBlock from Chrisajoudi, but gorhill has "uBlock Origin", which is supposedly the original one, and also the most updated one. You can read the wiki page about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock

Oh, uBlock origin got added back to the Chrome store?  Nice, now I can get out of developer mode on Chrome.

[Yog]

I would really like this. Currently I do my own screening, turning off blocking to sites I use regularly until they start displaying intrusive ads...this would make it easy for me...however, I don't trust adblock plus after they extorted big ad agencies into allowing their ads to play, basically holding every website hostage for money.

[Mister Snow]

And how do you expect to sustain your "free" internet if no ads are allowed? For all of those that are complaining.

This sounds like a good thing if it's done right.

[Zah]

And how do you expect to sustain your "free" internet if no ads are allowed? For all of those that are complaining.

This sounds like a good thing if it's done right.

I will view ads when they are no longer intrusive (pre-rolls on twitch are cancer), meaningless (30 seconds with no option to skip), and potentially filled with malware.

[EChondo]

Oh, uBlock origin got added back to the Chrome store?  Nice, now I can get out of developer mode on Chrome.

I wasn't aware that it was removed? But then again I don't use Chrome haha.

 

This is the one you should install(uBlock Origin from gorhill): https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm

 

And how do you expect to sustain your "free" internet if no ads are allowed? For all of those that are complaining.

This sounds like a good thing if it's done right.

So my $100 payment every month to AT&T is for free Internet?

[Ekpyrosis]

So my $100 payment every month to AT&T is for free Internet?

Does AT&T use that money to pay content creators?

[TetraSky]

Does AT&T use that money to pay content creators?

They should. Especially for that price.

[EChondo]

Does AT&T use that money to pay content creators?

What I'm trying to say is that I pay for my Internet, so I will filter out any unnecessary crap that hinders my experience. If content creators don't like that then don't blame me, blame the millions of ads out there that are annoying, intrusive, and feed malware and viruses to computers 24/7.

 

If every site just used banner ads then I wouldn't even bother with an adblocker, but nope, let's throw pop-ups, autoplaying videos, and minute long ads on our videos AND you can't skip them!

[Mister Snow]

I will view ads when they are no longer intrusive (pre-rolls on twitch are cancer), meaningless (30 seconds with no option to skip), and potentially filled with malware.

 

I agree with that but if marketing companies aren't willing to do away with that sort ads then some other solution has to be made until they realize what is the problem.

 

 

 

 

So my $100 payment every month to AT&T is for free Internet?

 

You pay your provider for an electric signal to be delivered to you and from you, not to have something at the other end of the line.

[EChondo]

You pay your provider for an electric signal to be delivered to you and from you, not to have something at the other end of the line.

Yup and I fully have control over what goes through that signal. If I don't want ads then I'm not going to have ads.

 

If that means services like YouTube go to a paid garden then so be it, but don't blame me when YouTube is at fault for shoving craptastic ads down our throats for years and have minute long ads that are not skippable after a certain amount of seconds.

 

If YouTube went banner ads only then YouTube will be whitelisted permanently from my ad blocker.

[Ekpyrosis]

What I'm trying to say is that I pay for my Internet, so I will filter out any unnecessary crap that hinders my experience. If content creators don't like that then don't blame me, blame the millions of ads out there that are annoying, intrusive, and feed malware and viruses to computers 24/7.

 

If every site just used banner ads then I wouldn't even bother with an adblocker, but nope, let's throw pop-ups, autoplaying videos, and minute long ads on our videos AND you can't skip them!

Internet access and access to content on the internet are two seperate things, paying for one doesn't entitle you to have the other.

I agree that a lot of ads are annoying, but that's again not related.

[Mister Snow]

Yup and I fully have control over what goes through that signal. If I don't want ads then I'm not going to have ads.

 

If that means services like YouTube go to a paid garden then so be it, but don't blame me when YouTube is at fault for shoving craptastic ads down our throats for years and have minute long ads that are not skippable after a certain amount of seconds.

 

If YouTube went banner ads only then YouTube will be whitelisted permanently from my ad blocker.

 

I agree with that but if this is done right it could offer that compromise we all want and that is to not have overly intrusive ads. It would be better then killing all ads like now. 

Don't get me wrong, I use adblock and whitelist sites that I often visit.