MSE News: 'I made £6,375 from YouTube videos last year'

Flyonthewall

Tropez wrote: »

To argue is to give reasons or cite evidence in support of a theory, idea or action. That is what you're doing and that is what I'm doing. It's not a condemnation to use the word 'argue' in this context.

I'd say argue if either side was stating their way was best and the other was wrong. No disagreement to argue over, just different ways of doing things. I'd call this a conversation or stating an opinion. I ignore ads, you block ads. Both fair enough. I wouldn't argue against ad blockers, they can be useful and I did used to use one, it just didn't work for me.

My comments really are just curiousity on how someone can find adverts, especially ones where you can blink and miss them, so bad that they feel the need to actively avoid all ads, even ones that could (massively) benefit them.

Adblock Plus requires a few button presses to install. It requires no extra setup unless you want to block all ads (by default, it permits advertising from certain groups who adhere to its own policy on responsible advertising). Updates are handled automatically and there's no under-the-hood tinkering required.

Yeah, but that's not the only option and I never said it was hard to do. I also said there was possibly other things that you'd need to do (which with some blockers there will be).

Yes, people who don't know what on earth they're doing with computers might have difficulties, but we're not talking about people who don't know what they're doing. I'm discussing this subject from my point of view, I've explained why I've done it and I've countered your assertions that it degrades my system's performance (it doesn't and it shouldn't degrade yours either) and that it was a hassle (it's not).

Well I was going for a more overall general view at that point of why ad blockers could be more hassle.

My original comment on performance was based on more than just one ad-blocker though, as was my comment on plugins I've used.

Perhaps hassle isn't quite the right word. Point is it's easier to do nothing than something regardless of quick and simple that something is.

Having said that, if you use offer sites as I do then an ad-blocker would probably be more hassle because it would block things you need to be able to see.

Therefore, if you argue that doing something is more hassle than doing nothing, I'll argue that "ignoring" adverts, including the ones that I've already decried as being overly obtrusive and inappropriate is more hassle for me than a few button presses and ridding my browsing experience of them for good.

I rarely see adverts that are overly obtrusive and inappropriate. If I kept seeing such ads I think I'd question the type of sites I'm finding myself on...

Tropez

Flyonthewall wrote: »

My comments really are just curiousity on how someone can find adverts, especially ones where you can blink and miss them, so bad that they feel the need to actively avoid all ads, even ones that could (massively) benefit them.

I rarely see adverts that are overly obtrusive and inappropriate. If I kept seeing such ads I think I'd question the type of sites I'm finding myself on...

I'll lump these together given your sly suggestion . As I said, I don't take issue with relevant and appropriate advertising.

I've already said that I find ads for charities that use graphic imagery to press their cause inappropriate on YouTube before certain types of material (malnourished children before comedy videos, for example). To me, there is a time and a place for such advertising. I'm fully aware of the plight of millions of poor people across the world. I don't need that reinforced when I'm trying to relax and amuse myself.

As for obtrusive, since I clear cookies and thus log myself out of MSE every time I finish a browser session, I find the advert for Martin's weekly email to be obtrusive, since it deliberately obstructs content on this site I wish to view and I'm already signed up anyway. It's no longer pushed to the forefront of a page I view while not logged in. I find that convenient. On the flip side, I don't mind the links that MSE provides to certain offers from which they receive a kickback in order to help fund the site. That's acceptable since it is relevant and MSE aren't being too obvious about it.

I find blog sites, particularly on the Blogger platform, that have overused Google's widgets to the point that content is not only framed by advertising but has further advertising in the text to be obtrusive. I find sites that hyperlink every other word to be obtrusive. As I've mentioned, because it is a particular bugbear, I find sites that have autoplaying video advertisements to be really annoying - mostly because these videos are often preset to play at max volume and I use a headset when on my computer. I don't want to do myself some hearing damage, or even get an unwelcome shock from something I'm not expecting.

My use of adblockers is a reaction to the way advertisers push their products. If adverts were still just simple banner adverts, one per page, then I probably wouldn't have reacted against them and employed adblockers to eliminate them. But they're not.

When advertisers and content providers go back to limited, relevant and appropriate advertising I may well disable my adblocker. If YouTube videos only employed adverts that were in some way relevant to the content of the video (and the algorithms exist to do this) then I probably wouldn't feel the need to block those. Again, that's why I don't mind what Linus does - he spends 15 seconds pushing a product at the start of his video and that's fine, because that product will be a tech product and he runs a tech channel. If he suddenly started pushing Adidas trainers or Pepsi though then I'd probably unsubscribe.

Yeah, but that's not the only option and I never said it was hard to do. I also said there was possibly other things that you'd need to do (which with some blockers there will be).

No, it isn't the only option but it's one of the most popular ones and at least in Firefox will be one of the first options when you look for an adblocker. One of the things I particularly like about Firefox is that Mozilla keep a rating page of their addons, naming and shaming the poorly optimised ones that have memory leaks, hog resources and all that. Since introducing that, many addons on Firefox improved significantly, not that Adblock Plus ever caused any browsing issues anyway.

Well I was going for a more overall general view at that point of why ad blockers could be more hassle.

My original comment on performance was based on more than just one ad-blocker though, as was my comment on plugins I've used.

Perhaps hassle isn't quite the right word. Point is it's easier to do nothing than something regardless of quick and simple that something is.

But it really depends on what you consider easier. Waiting five seconds and clicking skip on every five YouTube videos (or however often it is adverts currently play at) versus not seeing them at all. I consider not seeing them at all to be the "easier" method, given the 'effort' that actually goes into eliminating them.

Finding that annoying video ad on a page that's just decimated your hearing versus not having it play at all? Again, I find the latter to be easier.

The cummulative time saved from disabling such adverts far outweighs the sixty seconds it takes to install Adblock Plus in the first place. But as I say, I'm blocking them more because I want cleaner looking pages and less irrelevant claptrap forced on me.

Flyonthewall

Tropez wrote: »

I'll lump these together given your sly suggestion . As I said, I don't take issue with relevant and appropriate advertising.

Wasn't suggesting that, although I admit the thought crossed my mind Bad for adverts maybe, but probably relevant to the site you're on lol.

I use the WOT add-on and read titles/descriptions/link addresses before clicking on to a site so I usually manage to avoid any dodgy sites that just have a ton of ads and little content. I like to be aware of what I'm clicking on so as to avoid issues. I don't completely trust software to block everything dodgy, or to not block proper content for that matter.

I've already said that I find ads for charities that use graphic imagery to press their cause inappropriate on YouTube before certain types of material (malnourished children before comedy videos, for example). To me, there is a time and a place for such advertising. I'm fully aware of the plight of millions of poor people across the world. I don't need that reinforced when I'm trying to relax and amuse myself.

For certain ads I'd say there is more relevant content that they should be on. But I'm not sure I'd ever consider there to be a good time and place to show the graphic charity ads in that sense. I mean, no one wants to see that and we all know about it. Once the video starts I competely forget such ads though, assuming I actually saw what it was in the first place.

No, it isn't the only option but it's one of the most popular ones and at least in Firefox will be one of the first options when you look for an adblocker. One of the things I particularly like about Firefox is that Mozilla keep a rating page of their addons, naming and shaming the poorly optimised ones that have memory leaks, hog resources and all that. Since introducing that, many addons on Firefox improved significantly, not that Adblock Plus ever caused any browsing issues anyway.

Hasn't always been like that though. My experience was a few years back for adblock. I don't actually remember removing it, I don't know what happened with it...

On a few sites I use I do find my browser blocks (almost all) ads. Not got a clue what's doing it though lol.

But it really depends on what you consider easier. Waiting five seconds and clicking skip on every five YouTube videos (or however often it is adverts currently play at) versus not seeing them at all. I consider not seeing them at all to be the "easier" method, given the 'effort' that actually goes into eliminating them.

Finding that annoying video ad on a page that's just decimated your hearing versus not having it play at all? Again, I find the latter to be easier.

The cummulative time saved from disabling such adverts far outweighs the sixty seconds it takes to install Adblock Plus in the first place. But as I say, I'm blocking them more because I want cleaner looking pages and less irrelevant claptrap forced on me.

I still consider doing nothing easier, but I understand it being worthwhile long term for you.

Tropez

Flyonthewall wrote: »

I use the WOT add-on and read titles/descriptions/link addresses before clicking on to a site so I usually manage to avoid any dodgy sites that just have a ton of ads and little content. I like to be aware of what I'm clicking on so as to avoid issues. I don't completely trust software to block everything dodgy, or to not block proper content for that matter.

I find that there are some sites, a lot of the time they are blogs, which do have interesting content but the blog owner in their bid to monetise the blog (and I do understand why they do it) go absolutely potty sticking ads in every available widget area. I used Blogger myself for a while (since switched to self-hosted Wordpress) and while Google don't encourage you to go to such extremes, they certainly make it easy to do so.

It's not overly difficult on Wordpress but there seems to be something about Wordpress' customisation options (at least the self-hosted version) that encourage users to focus on creating appealing aesthetics. I'm sure there's self-hosted Wordpress sites that are laden with ads but it doesn't seem as common as it does with Blogger. I use a custom theme with a static front page. The front page would look like crap with an add on it, and the blog portion or other pages would lose the aesthetic style I've aimed for.

I use a couple of addons that notify about bad sites but they're mostly just looking for malware or phishing sites.

For certain ads I'd say there is more relevant content that they should be on. But I'm not sure I'd ever consider there to be a good time and place to show the graphic charity ads in that sense. I mean, no one wants to see that and we all know about it. Once the video starts I competely forget such ads though, assuming I actually saw what it was in the first place.

I can see the charity ads having their place in the correct context. If you're looking up a news or documentary piece about the plight of refugees in Africa then a charity ad would go hand in hand with that and may be more effective at soliciting donations. Of course the ad shows at the start of the video, possibly before a person has had their heart strings sufficiently plucked to make the donation but the name of the group may linger on long enough.

I work in a job where I deal with a lot of 'bad' things - fortunately, most of it is contained in report form but it is hard enough to shake some of the stuff I've had to read about/review during the day.

Hasn't always been like that though. My experience was a few years back for adblock. I don't actually remember removing it, I don't know what happened with it...

There's more than one addon which carries the 'Adblock' name. Adblock and Adblock Plus are not the same addons. My view is that Adblock Plus is superior and more user-friendly. Adblock itself is a little suspicious in the way it has started to operate.

Flyonthewall

Tropez wrote: »

I find that there are some sites, a lot of the time they are blogs, which do have interesting content but the blog owner in their bid to monetise the blog (and I do understand why they do it) go absolutely potty sticking ads in every available widget area. I used Blogger myself for a while (since switched to self-hosted Wordpress) and while Google don't encourage you to go to such extremes, they certainly make it easy to do so.

Yeah, it's generally people who have no clue about web design. It's too easy for anyone to set up a site. It's the reason that years ago we had all the bright coloured sites with flashing images. Most sites now offer themes which are generally better designs but people are now going mad with adverts instead

It's not overly difficult on Wordpress but there seems to be something about Wordpress' customisation options (at least the self-hosted version) that encourage users to focus on creating appealing aesthetics. I'm sure there's self-hosted Wordpress sites that are laden with ads but it doesn't seem as common as it does with Blogger. I use a custom theme with a static front page. The front page would look like crap with an add on it, and the blog portion or other pages would lose the aesthetic style I've aimed for.

Indeed. Wordpress requires a little more knowledge and thought than Blogger. Blogger is sign up, click on theme, write content, put on ads. Wordpress requires installing and specific plugins for the features you want.

I can see the charity ads having their place in the correct context. If you're looking up a news or documentary piece about the plight of refugees in Africa then a charity ad would go hand in hand with that and may be more effective at soliciting donations. Of course the ad shows at the start of the video, possibly before a person has had their heart strings sufficiently plucked to make the donation but the name of the group may linger on long enough.

True in that sense, but it's still something you don't want to see. The news itself is depressing enough without graphic charity ads first...

I work in a job where I deal with a lot of 'bad' things - fortunately, most of it is contained in report form but it is hard enough to shake some of the stuff I've had to read about/review during the day.

I'd say reading is probably worse than a video, more so for work. You have to focus on the content, read it word for word and take in what it says when it's a report in front of you. You may notice what a video is about, but that doesn't mean you're truly focused on it.

There's more than one addon which carries the 'Adblock' name. Adblock and Adblock Plus are not the same addons. My view is that Adblock Plus is superior and more user-friendly. Adblock itself is a little suspicious in the way it has started to operate.

I can't remember if it had plus on it or not. Possibly not but then I'd guess that adblock plus probably didn't exist otherwise I would have thought I'd have been using it lol.