https://www.theregister.com/2023/11/06/youtube_ad_blockers_opinion/ # # Sign in / up The Register(r) -- Biting the hand that feeds IT # # # Topics Security Security All SecurityCyber-crimePatchesResearchCSO (X) Off-Prem Off-Prem All Off-PremEdge + IoTChannelPaaS + IaaSSaaS (X) On-Prem On-Prem All On-PremSystemsStorageNetworksHPCPersonal TechCxOPublic Sector (X) Software Software All SoftwareAI + MLApplicationsDatabasesDevOpsOSesVirtualization (X) Offbeat Offbeat All OffbeatDebatesColumnistsScienceGeek's GuideBOFHLegalBootnotesSite NewsAbout Us (X) Special Features Special Features All Special Features Cloud Infrastructure Week Cybersecurity Month Blackhat and DEF CON Sysadmin Month The Reg in Space Emerging Clean Energy Tech Week Spotlight on RSA Energy Efficient Datacenters Vendor Voice Vendor Voice Vendor Voice All Vendor VoiceAmazon Web Services (AWS) Business TransformationDDN Google Cloud Data TransformationGoogle Cloud InfrastructureGoogle WorkspaceHewlett Packard Enterprise: AI & ML solutionsHewlett Packard Enterprise: Edge-to-Cloud PlatformIntel vProVMware (X) Resources Resources Whitepapers Webinars & Events Newsletters [personalte] Personal Tech 158 comment bubble on white YouTube cares less for your privacy than its revenues 158 comment bubble on white Ad blockers are firewalls for our sanity - turning them off is madness icon Rupert Goodwins Mon 6 Nov 2023 // 09:30 UTC # Opinion YouTube wants its pound of flesh. Disable your ad blocker or pay for Premium, warns a new message being shown to an unsuspecting test audience, with the barely hidden subtext of "you freeloading scum." Trouble is, its ad blocker detecting mechanism doesn't exactly comply with EU law, say privacy activists. Ask for user permission or taste regulatory boot. All good clean fun. youtube_648 Privacy advocate challenges YouTube's ad blocking detection scripts under EU law READ MORE Only it isn't. It's profoundly depressing. The battleground between ad tech and ad blockers has been around so long that in the internet's time span it's practically medieval. In 2010, Ars Technica started blocking ad blockers; in under a day, the ad blocker blocker was itself blocked by the ad blockers. The editor then wrote an impassioned plea saying that ad blockers were killing online journalism. As the editor ruefully notes, people weren't using blockers because they didn't care about the good sites, it was because so much else of the internet was filled with ad tech horrors. Nothing much has changed. If your search hit ends up with an "ERROR: Ad blocker detected. Disable it to access this content" then it's browser back button and next hit down, all day, every day. It's like running an app that asks you to disable your firewall; that app is never run again. Please disable my ad blocker? Sure, if you stop pushing turds through my digital letterbox. The reason YouTube has been dabbling with its own "Unblock Or Eff Off" strategy instead of bringing down the universal banhammer is that it knows how much it will upset the balance of the ecosystem. That it's had to pry deep enough into viewers' browsers to trigger privacy laws shows just how delicate that balance is. It's unstable because it's built on bad ideas. In that ecosystem of advertisers, content consumers, ad networks, and content distributors, ad blockers aren't the disease, they're the symptom. Trying to neutralize a symptom alone leaves the disease thriving while the host just gets sicker. In this case, the disease isn't cynical freeloading by users, it's the basic dishonesty of online advertising. It promises things to advertisers that it cannot deliver, while blocking better ways of working. It promises revenue to content providers while keeping them teetering on the brink of unviability, while maximizing its own returns. Google has revenues in the hundreds of billions of dollars, while publishers struggle to survive, and users have to wear a metaphorical hazmat suit to stay sane. None of this is healthy. * Too big to live, too loved to die: Big Tech's billion dollar curse of the free * Behind Big Tech's big privacy heist: Deliberate obfuscation * Windows 11: The number you have dialed has been disconnected * Excel Hell II: If the sickness can't be fixed, it must be contained Content providers have to be paid. We get that. Advertising is a valid way of doing that. We get that too. Advertisers need to reach audiences. Of course they do. But like this? YouTube needs its free, ad-supported model, or it would just force Premium on everyone, but forcing people to watch adverts will not force them to pony up for what's being advertised. The pre-internet days saw advertising directly support publishers who knew how to attract the right audiences who would respond well to the right adverts. Buy a computer magazine and it would be full of adverts for computer stuff - much of which you'd actually want to look at. The publisher didn't demand you have to see ads for butter or cars or some dodgy crypto. That model has gone away, which is why we need ad blockers. [personalte] YouTube's business model is a microcosm of the bigger ad tech world, where it basically needs to spam millions to generate enough results for its advertisers. It cannot stomach ad blockers, but it can't neutralize them technically or legally. So it should treat them like the cognitive firewalls they are. If YouTube developed ways to control what and how adverts appeared back into the hands of its content providers and viewers, perhaps we'd tell our ad blockers to leave YouTube alone - punch that hole through the firewall for the service you trust. We'd get to keep blocking things that needed to be blocked, content makers could build their revenues by making better content, and advertisers would get a much better return on their ad spend. [personalte] Of course, this wouldn't provide the revenues to YouTube or the ad tech business obtainable by being spammy counterfeits of responsible companies with a lock on the market. That a harmful business model makes a shipload of money does not make it good, in fact quite the reverse. So, to YouTube we say: you appear to be using a bad lock-in. Disable it, or pay the price. (r) Get our Tech Resources # Share More about * Advertising * Google * Youtube More like these x More about * Advertising * Google * Youtube Narrower topics * Android * App stores * Chrome * Chromium * Digital advertising displays * Google AI * Google Cloud Platform * Google I/O * Google Nest * G Suite * Kubernetes * Pixel * Privacy Sandbox * Tavis Ormandy Broader topics * Alphabet * Search Engine More about # Share 158 comment bubble on white COMMENTS More about * Advertising * Google * Youtube More like these x More about * Advertising * Google * Youtube Narrower topics * Android * App stores * Chrome * Chromium * Digital advertising displays * Google AI * Google Cloud Platform * Google I/O * Google Nest * G Suite * Kubernetes * Pixel * Privacy Sandbox * Tavis Ormandy Broader topics * Alphabet * Search Engine TIP US OFF Send us news --------------------------------------------------------------------- Other stories you might like Japan to probe Google over 'suspicion' that antitrust laws are being broken Updated Arrives at the same conclusion about the nexus of Android and search as pretty much everyone else Legal24 Oct 2023 | 11 Google - yes, that Google - testing proxy scheme to hide IP addresses for privacy Plan for Chrome echoes Apple iCloud Private Relay Software23 Oct 2023 | 26 Epic Games, Google head to court over epic Play Store cut Fortnite-maker largely lost against Apple, but can it beat the Chocolate Factory? Software6 Nov 2023 | 4 Putting AI challenges in perspective with partnerships How organizations en route to AI sufficiency can ease their journey by working with tech providers like HPE Sponsored Feature [personalte] Alphabet CEO testifies in Google Search trial: We pay billions to keep Apple at bay As Uncle Sam releases internal docs on Chrome strategy, MSN, more Personal Tech30 Oct 2023 | 17 Apple slams Android as a 'massive tracking device' in internal slides revealed in Google antitrust battle Whinges about Chrome maker's privacy stance while taking billions to, er, use its search engine Personal Tech3 Nov 2023 | 40 Google ends partnership to build four San Francisco GoogleBurbs Working from home, smaller office footprints, and cost cutting made GoogleVille redundant On-Prem3 Nov 2023 | 32 Help, Android 14 ate my Pixel! Bug causes endless reboots, loss of storage access Fix on the way but for those trapped in boot loop hell, data recovery isn't certain OSes30 Oct 2023 | 11 Android VPNs to get audit badges in Google Play Store if they aren't comically crap No promises it's actually secure, just that it doesn't do anything obviously dumb Applications4 Nov 2023 | 26 Google Cloud misses revenue estimates - and it's your fault, wanting smaller bills Keeping old servers alive is more lucrative than the G-Cloud Off-Prem25 Oct 2023 | 15 US, Australia solicit Google's help with Pacific subsea cable project $65 million cable project to connect US to Australia by way of Fiji and French Polynesia Networks26 Oct 2023 | 3 13-year Google privacy settlement pays litigants the equivalent of a Big Mac meal Chocolate Factory agrees $23m guilt-free settlement Legal25 Oct 2023 | 14 The Register icon Biting the hand that feeds IT About Us* * Contact us * Advertise with us * Who we are Our Websites* * The Next Platform * DevClass * Blocks and Files Your Privacy* * Cookies Policy * Privacy Policy * T's & C's * Do not sell my personal information Situation Publishing Copyright. All rights reserved (c) 1998-2023 no-js