Can MSE opt out of Phorm please?

[Deleted User]

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

If I want to buy a product or service I will search for it myself, so my using Adblock to stop these adverts appearing on my screen has absolutely no impact whatsoever on anyone :rolleyes:

Of course it does, there is a wide variety of websites that rely upon adverts to support the website and by blocking the website you're cutting off their revenue stream, you're affecting them.

If you enjoy a service, why should you not give something back!?

robt_2

citricsquid wrote: »

Of course it does, there is a wide variety of websites that rely upon adverts to support the website and by blocking the website you're cutting off their revenue stream, you're affecting them.

If you enjoy a service, why should you not give something back!?

Because some people are all take take take take.

~Chameleon~

citricsquid wrote: »

Of course it does, there is a wide variety of websites that rely upon adverts to support the website and by blocking the website you're cutting off their revenue stream, you're affecting them.

If you enjoy a service, why should you not give something back!?

Ok, maybe I'm missing something here but can you please explain to me how a website can generate revenue from an advert unless I actually click on the link?

Martin makes money on this site via the links with a star by them, but I have absolutely no problem with clicking on these to get to websites I want to visit as he is providing a vast amount of information totally free of charge. He's also not "selling or advertising" anything with these links.

And as you appear to be so in support of websites using advertising, how can you reconcile the ones that offer rip-off scams and too-good-to-be-true offers that brainwash vulnerable people, often costing them thousands of pounds?

Or pop-up adverts that divert people to websites they would never have dreamed of visiting and the contents of which can be quite disturbing and traumatic?

This is why every PC I set-up, and certainly all those accessible by my family, have Adblock Pro, Filterset.G and NoScript installed with the same priority I apply to FW, AV and anti-spyware.

robt_2

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

Ok, maybe I'm missing something here but can you please explain to me how a website can generate revenue from an advert unless I actually click on the link?

That is easy. Not all adverts are pay-per click, but I suspect you already know that and are ignoring it.

~Chameleon~

robt wrote: »

That is easy. Not all adverts are pay-per click, but I suspect you already know that and are ignoring it.

Sorry, but not sure what you're accusing me of here. I asked how a website can make revenue on an advert if I choose not to click on it. It was a genuine question.

robt_2

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

Sorry, but not sure what you're accusing me of here. I asked how a website can make revenue on an advert if I choose not to click on it. It was a genuine question.

In that case I apologise for my assumption. It was made due to the fact that you seemed quite an expert on how to block adverts and which firefox addons to use to achieve this along with script blocking. My assumption was wrong in assuming that your knowledge extended to how Internet advertising worked .

*MF*

Home Office 'colluded with Phorm'

The Home Office has previously denied that it has provided "any advice to Phorm directly relating to possible criminal liability for the operation of their advertising platform in the UK".

However, e-mail exchanges over a series of months between the department and the firm show the Home Office asking the firm what it thinks of the advice it is drawing up in relation to behavioural targeted advertising, and making specific reference to Phorm's technology.

In January 2008 the Home Office thanks Phorm for comments and changes to its draft paper, which show the company making deletions and changes to the document.

The Home Office official wrote to Phorm: "If we agree this, and this becomes our position do you think your clients and their prospective partners will be comforted."

Baroness Sue Miller, Liberal Democrat spokeswoman on Home Affairs, told BBC News: "My jaw dropped when I saw the Freedom of Information exchanges.

"The fact the Home Office asks the very company they are worried is actually falling outside the laws whether the draft interpretation of the law is correct is completely bizarre."

She added: "I couldn't be more surprised [that] the very department drawing up policy to protect people's privacy is being that cynical.

"Anything the Home Office now says about Phorm is completely tainted."

Extracts from here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8021661.stm

poppy10_2

Any news MSE opting out of Phorm?
BT has decided to drop Phorm due to all the bad publicity.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8135850.stm

MothballsWallet

I hope BT (and other providers) realise that Phorm is probably a breach of UN law, and they should be punished appropriately.