Marge and TiVo or is it kosher to block ads?
| Posted by Moishe Beshkin in Discussion
For the beginning, the Simpsons movie. For those, who don’t want to watch the whole move, there is a short scene with Marge (2:55 – 5:10), which demonstrates the problems with skipping ads on TV.
I do use Adblock plus plug-in for Firefox to dissolve inappropriate ads content. Although, my aim in blocking ads is so kosher and true, I can’t stop thinking that I do not return money in agreed way in exchange for obtained information.
Interesting opinion was declared in the topic From AdBlock Plus to TiVo – is blocking the ads stealing?. So, the issue is sharper in the frames of Halakha.
I have no clear answer on the subject’s question. I want to understand if blocking ads is problem from the poitn of view of Judaism, or not. And if it is, then how serious and what I can do here.
Popularity: 4% [?]
Twitter
Facebook
RSS
bahaltener | Nov 24, 2009 - 8 Kislev 5770 at 7:41 pm
There is no agreement with the user that he should return any money to anyone, unless such agreement was signed by the user.
You are mixing different entities. In advertisement business there are publishers, providers and users.
Publisher wants to advertise certain product or service. Provider gives him means to do it (serving advertisement media such as ads, banners, etc.), and users sees and uses (or ignores) these ads.
Now, there is an agreement between *publisher* and *provider*. Let’s say publisher pays to provider N amount of money so it will show his ads M amount of times. And if user acts on those ads (for example clocks on them), provider gets extra money.
Note, there is nothing about the user here, the agreement is solely between publisher and provider. Now, let’s say I don’t like ads. I consider them all spam and waste of my precious time. I don’t like looking at huge signs along the road, which distract and cause accidents, I don’t like paper spam in my mail, digital spam in my e-mal, and flashing and blinking ads all over the web. What do I do?
I block them. Have a right to. Something is just to hard to block, and the way is just to look away (for example huge sign near the road), but other stuff is easier to block. That’s why he have spam filters and etc.
Now, having adblock in a browser is just like not looking at an ad (wearing filter glasses if you like). I.e. the provider doesn’t break the agreement with the publisher. It tries to serve his ads. But I don’t like them – I don’t look at them using tricky technical means. Alas, the provider is not getting paied possible, depending on his agreement because I don’t want to look at his ads. The publisher doens’t get his income from my interest in his stuff. But it’s their issue, not mine.
It’s a personal and rightful choice, whether to look at ads, or to ignore (block) them.
Moishe Beshkin | Nov 25, 2009 - 9 Kislev 5770 at 1:27 pm
I cannot agree that there is absolutely no obligations on User.
I have an example:
Content provider places Donate button on the site. User has freedom – to pay or not to pay. So, User decides, that he doesn’t like Donate button all time in range of view. User enables a tool, which blocks Donate button from showing. As a result, User denies not the donation process, but the reminder for donation.
We all know, that today money are payed per click. So, User blocks not actual payment for content, but the reminder of such possibility.
bahaltener | Nov 25, 2009 - 9 Kislev 5770 at 3:33 pm
Again – it’s user’s choice to look or not to look. And use different ways of NOT to look. You can’t take away this freedom from the user.
Axel Berger | Dec 12, 2009 - 26 Kislev 5770 at 5:42 pm
I’m with Moishe here. Things are either free or not free. In America they place a jug of water on the table, in Europe you have to order bottled water and it can be more expensive than other drinks. Now I may prefer the American way (I do, since I experienced it) but I can’t order water and refuse to pay.
Websites are either free, you need to pay and log in, like for scientific journal articles, or they are financed through adverts. If they are, I may well mutter “sod you” and leave, but if I accept and consume the content, I have implicitly agreed to whatever payment the content provider has openly made part of the bargain from the start. I may write him a letter, telling him exactly what I think about him and his shoddy deal, but blocking the ad and reading the content is a bit like shoplifting.
Moishe Beshkin | Dec 13, 2009 - 26 Kislev 5770 at 3:11 am
Alex, thank you for reply.
I have no strong position on this question, because I need to block Ads in order to prevent “unwanted” content to be displayed (e.g. nudity in pictures). I try to filter Adblock plugin to not display images, that’s work for me, because I have no big problem with words in Ads. But this method is not ideal either. So, I am looking for a golden solution, which would be suitable for me as a User and for author as a Provider of content.