[HN Gopher] Banner blindness
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Banner blindness
        
       Author : yamrzou
       Score  : 85 points
       Date   : 2024-03-29 18:53 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (en.wikipedia.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (en.wikipedia.org)
        
       | reidjs wrote:
       | That article will be very meta next time Jimmy Wales' face is
       | plastered over the page asking for wikipedia donations.
        
         | andai wrote:
         | That might be why his face is there. Surely that counteracts
         | banner blindness (at least partially)?
        
       | karaterobot wrote:
       | > A higher than expected number of advertisements may cause a
       | user to view the page as cluttered.[7] The number of adverts and
       | annoyances on a webpage contribute to this perception of
       | clutter.[6] As users can concentrate on only one stimulus at a
       | time, having too many objects in their field of vision causes
       | them to lose focus.[8] This contributes to behaviors such as ad
       | avoidance or banner blindness.
       | 
       | I have done a pretty good job filtering out advertisements and
       | other annoying web crap, and if anything ever sneaks through I
       | notice it immediately. Whatever the opposite of banner blindness
       | is, that's what I exhibit. Banner hypersensitivity?
        
         | CoffeeTails wrote:
         | Same here. Some pages are, for me, unusable without blocking
         | all ads and banners. Especially if they move or have bright
         | colors!
        
         | dhosek wrote:
         | Sometimes banner blindness becomes total blindness:
         | https://bsky.app/profile/dahosek.bsky.social/post/3kop4ci756...
        
           | malfist wrote:
           | I don't get how companies, who's only product is content, get
           | their content to be so....distastefully full of ads.
        
             | kjkjadksj wrote:
             | The content is not the product just like how the chum a
             | fisherman tosses is not the product. The product is the
             | customer base and they make money selling access to it for
             | advertising.
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | Exactly. That's the truth of modern Internet - including
               | social media: content is not the product, it's _bait_.
        
               | Nextgrid wrote:
               | I'd argue that with so many KPIs based around
               | "engagement", it's not just social media but software in
               | general.
        
               | ben_w wrote:
               | This makes me feel worse about LLMs...
        
           | jollyllama wrote:
           | Yes, this is the chosen "solution" to banner blindness
        
           | andai wrote:
           | Hey, once you accept cookies, a full 50% of vertical height
           | becomes available for reading.
        
         | thih9 wrote:
         | What do you use? Does this approach work both on desktop or
         | mobile?
        
           | YoshiRulz wrote:
           | uBlock Origin has been available on Android Firefox for
           | years.
        
       | saghm wrote:
       | I feel like a similar thing happens in "real life" sometimes, not
       | just on websites. Back in high school, I used to volunteer at an
       | animal shelter, and we had an area out back where we'd walk the
       | dogs or let them run around in one of a few fenced in areas
       | throughout the day so they could go to the bathroom and get some
       | exercise. The door leading out here was located in one of the
       | rooms with dog kennels, so people coming to potentially adopt a
       | dog would walk through this room a lot, and often they'd try to
       | walk out back and watch or participate with the volunteers and
       | staff taking some of the dogs out. We'd ask them politely to go
       | back inside because they aren't allowed out there and point out
       | the very large sign in large font on the door saying this, and
       | every time they'd always act very surprised because they claimed
       | not to have seen it. I'm sure some people were just feigning
       | ignorance because it seemed easier, but the sheer number of
       | people claiming it makes it believable that at least _some_ of
       | them genuinely didn't notice; they saw a door, they wanted to go
       | through, and they opened it without processing the words right in
       | front of their face.
        
         | bagels wrote:
         | There are so many signs that everyone encounters everyday that
         | are of no consequence. Everyone develops the habit of not
         | reading them.
        
           | pixl97 wrote:
           | Adblock for the brain.
           | 
           | This is the problem with advertisements. The vie so hard for
           | your attention they really are hard to ignore. But after they
           | catch your attention you've realized that your attention has
           | just been wasted. Soon you catch yourself just filtering out
           | anything that could potentially be an ad.
        
         | breischl wrote:
         | Definitely a thing. Just yesterday I was annoyed by my auto
         | mechanic's credit card fee, and said they should've told me up
         | front.
         | 
         | She pointed out it was on a sign on the counter that I was
         | looking at that moment, and had also been there when I dropped
         | the car off the day before.
        
         | Sharlin wrote:
         | All of us act, much of the time, on varying degrees of
         | autopilot. It's unlikely that the automatic parts of the brain
         | can read, although presumably they are quite capable of
         | pattern-recognizing and processing learned symbolic language
         | like traffic signs (and even that's by no means guaranteed - so
         | many humans merrily ignore or miss changes in signage in
         | traffic, having traveled the same route a thousand times
         | before).
         | 
         | The strength and type of stimulus required to "wake us up" -
         | for the brain to realize there's something novel or unexpected
         | that requires the activation of higher-level, analytic parts of
         | the brain - probably varies a lot from person to person, but
         | just a bunch of text is not always enough to do that unless
         | accompanied by familiar semiotic language, which is of course
         | the reason we use symbols and colors to make important messages
         | more likely to be perceived and understood. The best wake-up
         | signals are, of course, those that physically prevent you from
         | doing something you intended to do - a locked door, for
         | example.
        
         | petsfed wrote:
         | There are situations where its hard to understand _how_ even
         | the non-verbal warnings didn 't latch though.
         | 
         | There's "no unauthorized personnel", and then there's "Fire
         | door, alarm will sound".
         | 
         | In college, i worked at a university recreation center, and the
         | desk I worked at was about 15 feet from a fire door. It sat
         | somewhat between the weight room and the men's locker room, so
         | virtually all male customers walked past this specific, well
         | marked, fire door during their visit. And about 2-3 times a
         | week, while I was working, somebody would finish up their
         | workout and just push that door open and walk out. And every
         | time, they'd look thunderstruck that the alarm did in fact
         | sound.
         | 
         | I eventually dropped all pretense of understanding that they
         | were on autopilot, and began commenting as I deactivated and
         | reactivated the alarm AGAIN "I thought universities required
         | students be able to read". Only one person ever got short with
         | me over that, and all I had to do was point at the letters that
         | were bigger than their head, directly at eye level, 18 inches
         | from their face, while they pushed the door open.
        
           | QuantumYeti wrote:
           | Sounds like you were upset that you had a job looking at a
           | door, and took it out on people.
        
             | ethanbond wrote:
             | It's totally reasonable to scold people for using emergency
             | exits (especially alarmed ones) without an emergency need.
             | 
             | It _also_ doesn't make you a bad person or stupid to
             | subconsciously miss signage. But you should be okay with a
             | bit of scolding in that case.
        
               | QuantumYeti wrote:
               | It's not reasonable to scold strangers, especially if
               | you're just some random employee.
        
               | vermilingua wrote:
               | Yes, it absolutely is reasonable to scold strangers for
               | things like this, _especially_ if you're an employee who
               | sees it happening regularly.
        
               | permo-w wrote:
               | scolding is broadly something you do to someone you see
               | as beneath you. if you feel the need to scold strangers,
               | you've probably got other issues
        
               | petsfed wrote:
               | So if one of your peers pulls a fire alarm or blasts an
               | air horn in your work place, while you're on a call or
               | engaged in some other highly focused task, the
               | appropriate response is to just shrug and think "I need
               | to be such a highly emotionally controlled person that I
               | can only passively deactivate the alarm, contact an
               | authority who won't even be here before the culprit
               | leaves and just move on with my day"?
               | 
               | Fine, I didn't "scold" this person, I called out a peer
               | for their shitty, antisocial behavior. Or is holding
               | someone accountable even in words for the painful
               | consequences of their decisions unacceptable too?
        
               | kelnos wrote:
               | I think you have a definition for "scolding" outside the
               | mainstream.
               | 
               | You scold someone who has done something wrong and should
               | know better. There need not be any judgment about the
               | person's worth attached.
        
               | MrVandemar wrote:
               | If you're an employee, and a member of the public is in
               | your workplace, then you have a reasonable expectation
               | that they will behave according to the rules of that
               | workplace. Often these rules are for safety, and for sure
               | it is absolutely reasonable to scold strangers if they
               | have zero situational awareness.
               | 
               | I work in a medical practice. We have an expectation that
               | people will obey rules for their and our protection. For
               | example: we had a sign that, at our reception desk, that
               | people should stay behind a line and not approach too
               | close.
               | 
               | There was a thick, clearly visible tape line on the
               | floor.
               | 
               | There was a two large signs on reception desk asking
               | patients to stay behind the line.
               | 
               | This is during the heightened awareness of the pandemic.
               | People were asked to change their behavior in many ways.
               | 
               | Patients would just come up to the reception desk and
               | lean _over_ the desk.
               | 
               | Damn right I "scolded" them for it. I mean, I didn't
               | roast them, but I used a tone of voice, and asked them to
               | step away from the desk, and pointed out the signs. Some
               | of them were cranky about doing so ... when SARS was
               | rampant!
        
               | ethanbond wrote:
               | "Just some random employee" as in... the person tasked
               | with maintaining security and safety of the facility?
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | Is there even a reason for an emergency exit to not be
               | treated as a regular, auxiliary exit? I.e. not labeled as
               | regular, but also not an issue if people use it.
        
               | kelnos wrote:
               | The reason is often the opposite: you don't want people
               | coming _in_ that door (maybe it 's a limited-access
               | building and you don't want to staff security/ID checker
               | at more locations). Sure, you can lock it from the
               | outside, but if people are regularly leaving from that
               | door, randos outside are going to sneak in before the
               | door shuts.
        
               | petsfed wrote:
               | If the facility has any need to control access, they need
               | to be more aggressive than just one way doors, since
               | fire-code compliant one-way doors are trivially defeated
               | with a doorstop.
        
               | Terr_ wrote:
               | > Is there even a reason for an emergency exit to not be
               | treated as a regular, auxiliary exit?
               | 
               | Absolutely, ex:
               | 
               | 1. When that exit may be used _as an entrance_ to a
               | prohibited or fee-only area. Someone inside opens the
               | latch for people waiting outside, either intentionally or
               | accidentally, allowing them to enter without being
               | noticed.
               | 
               | 2. To supplement other things which may trigger an alarm,
               | or for situations (e.g. violence) that can't be detected
               | by a simple detector. It also means you don't need to
               | plant as many alarm-panels around the place which
               | panicked people are unlikely to use on their way out
               | anyway.
        
             | petsfed wrote:
             | I dunno how much time you've spent around fire alarms, but
             | they're required to be painfully loud. Not "permanent
             | damage" loud, but loud enough to trigger e.g. migraines in
             | people who suffer from them. This door had a fire alarm on
             | it.
             | 
             | The university needed to control access to the facility
             | through one secure checkpoint (that I had worked at in the
             | past, but at this time no longer did so). They didn't want
             | (for instance) random townies to be able to come and go via
             | the side doors without filling out the relevant liability
             | waivers, because it turns out screwing around in a weight
             | room carries some risk. To say nothing of the consequences
             | of some rando wandering in off the street and posting up in
             | the locker room.
             | 
             | I was answering phone calls, helping people rent outdoor
             | equipment. My job was not at all watching the door. But I
             | had to deal with 19 year olds who (and I did watch this a
             | couple times) would look directly at the sign, pause to
             | read it, push the door open, then have an utterly shocked
             | expression that the _PAINFULLY LOUD_ alarm was going off.
             | And I 'd have to drop whatever I was doing, go turn off the
             | alarm, then recompose and return to the customer that I was
             | helping.
             | 
             | Please explain to me what is so objectionable about a
             | school controlling access to its facilities.
        
           | Terr_ wrote:
           | > "Fire door, alarm will sound".
           | 
           | IMO those doors shouldn't just have a sign-sticker slapped on
           | them, there ought to be something visually (and tactilely)
           | different about the push-bar itself.
           | 
           | P S.: For example, a _wavy_ bar, or a bunch of distinctly
           | raised bumps on the surface in strong contrasting color like
           | high-vis yellow with reflectivity.
           | 
           | Since this is for an indoor surface _nobody should be
           | touching_ , that means durability isn't a big issue: Just
           | stick some adhesive blister-chunks onto whichever push-bar
           | happens to need the warning, and then scrape them off if the
           | situation changes.
        
             | petsfed wrote:
             | The whole reason that I had keys to enable/disable the
             | alarm was specifically because the Outdoor Program that I
             | worked at needed to load in/out large equipment (think
             | canoes, bikes, sleds, etc) that was ungainly to move
             | through the locker room. This was also the primary avenue
             | for moving e.g. weight room equipment in and out of the
             | facility. So while it didn't get used a lot for non-
             | emergency use, it got used often enough that non-durable
             | controls would degrade much too quickly.
        
             | codazoda wrote:
             | Many of these, however, should just be doors. For many of
             | them the alarming of them seems unnecessary.
        
           | permo-w wrote:
           | >I eventually dropped all pretense of understanding that they
           | were on autopilot, and began commenting as I deactivated and
           | reactivated the alarm AGAIN "I thought universities required
           | students be able to read".
           | 
           | this is an odd sentiment. so what, you were originally
           | _pretending_ to give them the benefit of the doubt, but then
           | you just gave up? so your original thought was that they were
           | doing it on purpose for some reason? why on earth would they
           | do that?
        
             | petsfed wrote:
             | I started out giving people (the perps were uniformly male)
             | the benefit of the doubt, but my patience wore thin with
             | how frequently it happened, and finally I started
             | explicitly calling people out.
             | 
             | I suppose, I should've phrased it as
             | 
             | "I eventually dropped _even the_ pretense of
             | understanding... "
             | 
             | >why on earth would they do that?
             | 
             | Why on earth would a 19 year old male, who has never been
             | away from home before, has likely never seen any real
             | consequences for their behavior before, read a sign that
             | warns them of said consequences, and still decide that
             | those consequences are less bad than walking an extra 100
             | feet through a locker room?
             | 
             | I assume the same reason that similarly aged college males
             | removed all of the fluorescent light tubes from the
             | hallways of their own dorm. Or the same reason at least one
             | of the shower drains in the dorm's men's communal bathroom
             | was plugged with paper towels every month.
        
           | nkrisc wrote:
           | If it looks like a regular door, people will open it. If it
           | is not a regular door, it should not look like one.
        
         | josefresco wrote:
         | > feigning ignorance
         | 
         | We have our hourly rate printed on a sign in our conference
         | room. The walls are very clean, with almost no other signage.
         | Despite communicating my rate to a client (via email) and
         | having two meetings in this room, this particular client was
         | shocked when they received my final bill which (again) stated
         | our rate. I believe in this case they were just unhappy and
         | looking for an "emotional plea" way out of payment.
        
         | ben_w wrote:
         | I once visited a sword shop, and only noticed the signs tiled
         | every metre horizontally and vertically across the walls saying
         | "do not touch" when the person I was with told me about them as
         | my fingers hovered mere centimetres from one of the wall-
         | mounted blades.
         | 
         | I also didn't notice the moonwalking gorilla in the famous
         | video clip despite being aware in advance that there would be
         | one.
        
         | neon5077 wrote:
         | In the early days of the pandemic, the retail chain I worked
         | for had a curbside delivery only policy. No customers in the
         | store period, you had to call us and we'd bring your whatever
         | out to you.
         | 
         | No amount of signage on the door would stop people walking in.
         | I stacked a bunch of boxes physically blocking the door and
         | people still forced their way in.
         | 
         | The _only_ thing that worked was putting a strip of blue
         | painter 's tape across the doorway directly at eye level.
         | 
         | I have long since stopped trying to make sense of other
         | people's behavior.
        
           | bagels wrote:
           | A bunch of stacked boxes are really ambiguous. Did someone
           | stack them there on accident, or as a prank?
        
         | D-Coder wrote:
         | NotAlwaysRight.com has tons of stories about people who ignored
         | signs, closed doors, _locked_ doors etc.
        
       | paganel wrote:
       | I'm exactly like that, this is why I can browse the web with no
       | ad-blocker installed with almost no issue, by default I just
       | ignore all banners.
       | 
       | Curiously enough the same thing does not happen when watching
       | regular TV programs. I've stopped watching regular TV almost 4
       | years ago, and that's why when I happen to visit some of my
       | friends who have the TV on I'm always surprised whenever ads
       | interrupt whatever is being shown, I can't understand how come
       | people can put up with that. I guess they formed "TV ad
       | blindness"
        
         | andai wrote:
         | I think the difference is that you can't ignore an ad when it
         | comes on, because the thing you were watching goes away.
         | Whereas even on the worst websites you can just scroll or click
         | the X and get back to what you were doing.
        
       | drexlspivey wrote:
       | My favorite example of this
       | https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/120541/why-do-people-...
        
       | ot wrote:
       | Surprised that neither the article or this thread link to
       | https://xkcd.com/570/
        
       | kaycebasques wrote:
       | This can be a GOTCHA in docs site UX. A lot of docs sites use
       | admonitions (e.g. [1]) to call special attention to a particular
       | piece of info and, ironically, the admonition might make readers
       | less likely to see the info.
       | 
       | [1] https://docusaurus.io/docs/markdown-features/admonitions
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | I ran into this about 8 years ago. I was using a new dev tool,
         | and the docs said there was a UI element to do something. I
         | looked, and looked and just could find what they were talking
         | about. So I contacted them to ask what the deal was, and they
         | sent me a screen grab. Turns out what I was looking for was in
         | a weird rectangle embedded halfway down the page and centered
         | on the 3rd quartile of the width of the page.
         | 
         | Exactly where someone would stick an ad into an HTML page. They
         | had put a box around it and styled it a little differently, so
         | my brain tuned it right out.
        
       | quercusa wrote:
       | Prop 65 has entered the chat...
        
       | user- wrote:
       | They should include a blurb about Wikipedia's donation requests
        
         | gunshai wrote:
         | I thought that's what the article was going to be about tbh.
        
       | eastbound wrote:
       | Wikipedia has had a banner for 20 of the last 20 years, claiming
       | not to be able to pay hosting and management bills, while hosting
       | and management represent about 1% of their global finances, while
       | they have various endeavours like hiring paid rewriters to
       | rewrite Wikipedia in various political ways.
        
       | bdcravens wrote:
       | I wish the image in the article was a screenshot of Wikipedia
       | begging for donations.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fundraising_banner.jpeg
        
         | permo-w wrote:
         | why wish? make it so
        
           | whamlastxmas wrote:
           | To be fair the existing image is a really good example
        
       | omoikane wrote:
       | > Users dislike animated ads
       | 
       | This section cites a few sources from ~10 years ago, but we still
       | see those annoying video ads pop up in random places in 2024. I
       | wonder if those ads were actually bought by competing companies
       | with the intent to bring negative attitudes toward whatever is
       | being advertised.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-03-29 23:00 UTC)