Sick of website commercials

[blasterman]

I'm active in numerous technical forums and have been so since the BBS days, and have found the evolution of ad revenue on sites like this to be interesting.

CPF is clearly amongst the least annoying sites in terms ofadvertising, but this also has a lot to due with being a very specific hobby. Also, done properly, site advertising has minimal annoyance and can actually generate some interest in products we'd normally not be aware of.

This sure beats floating nagware that scrolls over the middle of your screen demanding attention to close it while you're trying to read around it. Also, in the past year or so I've noticed a drastic increase in page bloat on the internet in general and complaints about linked content causing browser issues (all platforms). In the past 6months it's really got bad as advertisers are getting more income from accounts that have previously tightened their belts.

 

[TomH]

For a long time, I've made a point of NOT buying any products if they insist on interrupting my TV viewing. I'll bet I'm not the only one.

+1 :thumbsup:

Here's to hoping that these advertisers will figure this out eventually, however, I'm not holding my breath.

 

[LowBat]

I actually like the ads here on CPF. No auto insurance girl or gecko, no erectile dysfunction cream, just flashlights and flashlight paraphernalia.

 

[LuxLuthor]

I know this thread is about commercials at the beginning of videos on the internet.

But what I hate, hate , hate is the tiny little ads in the bottom corner of the TV during the show. And it gets worse. Then, still during the actual program, they have a dancing advertisement go from one end of the screen to the other.

:hairpull:

:hairpull:

LOL! I'm totally with you on this one. Especially on channels that are showing foreign language films with subtitles!!!

I also agree that CPF ads about flashlights are useful, interesting, and not irritating.

 

[LotusDarkrose]

I know this thread is about commercials at the beginning of videos on the internet.

But what I hate, hate , hate is the tiny little ads in the bottom corner of the TV during the show. And it gets worse. Then, still during the actual program, they have a dancing advertisement go from one end of the screen to the other.

:hairpull:

:hairpull:

Your post reminded me of an SNL skit with Will Ferrell. Finally found it! lol

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/4601107056/snl-clip-mark

 

[bstrickler]

Yep. Youtube does NOT need to show video ads-they already make a ridiculous amount of money. On a website like hulu, I can understand. They have to pay royalties as well as hosting, and the commercials are actually a lot shorter than on TV (although they have been slowly increasing them).

I just refresh the page to bypass the ads on Youtube. Hulu has never bothered me, because they're allowing you to watch TV on the internet. I expect commercials when watching TV shows. What would be nice, though, is the ability to have it automatically pause the video after the commercials, so you can do something during the commercials, and not have to worry about missing part of the show.

I don't mean to be a brown-noser, but

Greta,
Once I finally get a job, and have some extra money, I'll see what I'll be able to donate to help keep this place running. I've had so much use out of this forum.

Maybe consider doing a 5% fee on items over say $20 (just as an example) or something on CPFMP, if the costs get to be too much for you. I wouldn't mind paying you 5% of the selling price, if it allows me to keep using the forum. I'm not sure how you'd go about enforcing that, though.



~Brian

 

[Jay R]

God bless the BBC. No adverts on TV, no adverts on their online iplayer.

 

[StarHalo]

God bless the BBC. No adverts on TV, no adverts on their online iplayer.

No new Top Gear on BBC America until months after the season has ended, and no access to the website clips for American viewers; as long as I'm treated like second-class clientele, down with the BBC.

 

[Jay R]

No new Top Gear on BBC America until months after the season has ended, and no access to the website clips for American viewers; as long as I'm treated like second-class clientele, down with the BBC.

Well, it is the BRITISH Broadcasting Company paid for by MY tv license. Why should my money be used so's you can get advert free programs. It would be a bit like expecting you to pay for my cable.


Still, if you were to take back British rule.....

 

[ECL]

My question was specific to what Greta said above: "Somehow I have to make up for those who block the ads and don't donate anything to the site for its upkeep..." wondering if she or the advertisers know how many, or if anyone is blocking their ads, and if not, how that connected to needing to make up for it with new/different revenues. It was an informational curiosity.

To answer your question,it is pretty easy to know how many viewer use adblocker. Looking at the logs you know a page was downloaded 2000 times but your add revenue pay-slip says it was only viewed 500 times. As for making it up for it, well you still have to pay the bandwidth of 1500 page download that didn't made any revenue.

Now even understanding those principles, I do use addblock plus to block annoying pop-up and flash add. Text base add and simple pictures are ok, as long as they don't take an abusive amount of space.

 

[Monocrom]

Well, it is the BRITISH Broadcasting Company paid for by MY tv license. Why should my money be used so's you can get advert free programs. It would be a bit like expecting you to pay for my cable.

He wasn't complaining about having to sit through commercials. He was complaining about the ridiculously long wait that we, on this side of the pond, have to deal with just to see new episodes of Top Gear.

Put the adverts in. That's fine. But why is the wait so many months apart? And on top of that, "Oh sorry, no website clips for you!"

For all we know, Clarkson could have died of old age.

 

[wyager]

What would be nice, though, is the ability to have it automatically pause the video after the commercials, so you can do something during the commercials, and not have to worry about missing part of the show.

Pause the commercial and then click play again. The video will not play after the commercial until you click the play button. I love that trick...
EDIT:I just tried, it doesn't work anymore.

Well, it is the BRITISH Broadcasting Company paid for by MY tv license. Why should my money be used so's you can get advert free programs. It would be a bit like expecting you to pay for my cable.


Still, if you were to take back British rule.....

Does everyone have to pay a TV license? That seems absolutely ridiculous, government controlled and sponsored media... That's about two steps away from being the same as the north korean broadcasting system.

 

[LuxLuthor]

To answer your question,it is pretty easy to know how many viewer use adblocker. Looking at the logs you know a page was downloaded 2000 times but your add revenue pay-slip says it was only viewed 500 times. As for making it up for it, well you still have to pay the bandwidth of 1500 page download that didn't made any revenue.

Thanks for giving this information.

I did not know that there was a way to tell if a graphic ad was not viewed vs. # of page downloads that should have shown it, and that affects my actions with supporting sites I enjoy. That alone makes me want to unblock CPF, which I periodically do anyway, except one lingering question.

If a banner advertiser is paying a fee for the banner, do they get the feedback of the number of times a page is loaded vs. frequency of their image seen/blocked, as Greta implied, and thereby needing to make up that lost ad revenue?

Again, I'm just asking because I like to know how things work, and in no way am trying to question the need for revenue in keeping a site like this working as well as it does (which is why I have always been a support benefactor).

I appreciate your expertise and feedback.

 

[Jay R]

Does everyone have to pay a TV license? That seems absolutely ridiculous, government controlled and sponsored media... That's about two steps away from being the same as the north korean broadcasting system.

You have to pay a licence if you own any equipment capable of receiving live broadcast be it through a TV set, computer (eg: TV decoder card )or otherwise. About $230 a year. Discounts for black and white telly or if you are blind etc... Funds go to the BBC so's they can make television programs, radio, websites without any adverts. You still have to pay even if you don't watch the BBC channels.

Government is not involved apart from making the laws surrounding it.

Please note that there are very strong rules ( more than most people think ) on certain areas such as the news programs being impartial. There are a number of public independent bodies that monitor this along with large consumer organisations. On top of that, viewers such as myself would ( and have ) cause an uproar if we felt, for example, the news was biased in any way.

In short, as it's we the public that pay for the BBC, we make VERY sure that it is not biased in any way towards the government or any other political party.

 

[LowBat]

I like the idea of paying for TV without commercials. I think that was the original idea behind cable TV here in the states. Unfortunately it blossomed into both paying AND the commercials.

I would also like to have the impartial newscasts. Ours make that claim but in reality the main stream media have a tendancy to filter out what doesn't paint the picture they want us to see, instead focusing on swaying the viewers opinion like an Orwellian agenda.