Skip to main content

Adblock Plus threatens the online revenue model

After a good, long run, we have decided to close our forums in an effort to refocus attention to other sections of the site. Fortunately for you all, we're living in a time where discussion of a favorite topic now has a lot of homes. So we encourage you all to bring your ravenous love for discussion to Chuck's official Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and Instagram. And, as always, you can still post comments on all News updates. Thank you for your loyalty and passion over the years. These changes will happen June 1.

Nobody knows about it, so shhh!

Adblock Plus threatens the online revenue model
By Noam Cohen
Sunday, September 2, 2007

NEW YORK: Adblock Plus, an easy-to-use free addition to the Firefox Internet browser that deletes advertisements from Web sites is still a niche product for the niche browser. But it is potentially a huge development in the online world, and not because it simplifies Web sites cluttered with advertisements.

The larger importance of Adblock is its potential for extreme menace to the online-advertising business model. After an installation that takes but a minute or two, Adblock usually makes all commercial communication disappear. No flashing whack-a-mole banners. No highly targeted Google ads based on the search terms you've entered.

From that perspective, the program is an unwelcome arrival after years of worry that there might never be an online-advertising business model to support the expense of creating entertainment programming or journalism or sophisticated, highly responsive search engines, for that matter.

For now, however, the big players have decided to ignore the phenomenon. Neither Google nor, for example, would comment on ad-blocking programs, which can also be added to Microsoft's Internet Explorer 7.

The Internet Explorer add-ons are not necessarily free and do not necessarily work as seamlessly as Adblock Plus working with the open-source Firefox browser.

Wladimir Palant, developer of the open-source Adblock Plus project, wrote in an e-mail that he had not heard anything from large companies like Google, because, he suspects, the program "isn't popular enough yet, attacking it would be a waste of time for these companies." He estimated that there were 2.5 million users around the world.

"The numbers are rising steadily," he wrote, adding that his figures don't "show exponential growth any more but there are still 300,000 to 400,000 new users each month."

Palant, a 27-year-old programmer in Cologne, Germany, is not an ideological opponent of online advertising. For example, he counts himself a fan of the ads that show up with a Google search, saying they are useful and unobtrusive. That does not mean that Adblock will not block Google's ads, however, it means that Palant has to customize his own version of the program to allow them in.

But if enough people rally to Adblock and similar services, it could be considered the computer's version of TiVo, the video recorder that allows users to skip ads, except without any expensive equipment or service charges.

And perhaps most critically, as an open-source project, Adblock is in the hands of anyone who wants to contribute. So no one can decide to make a deal with prominent Web sites to change the way the program operates.

For now, the opposition to Adblock Plus has been led by small Web sites who want all Firefox users blocked from Internet sites in retaliation.

One such advocacy site,, taunts a Firefox user with the headline, "You've reached this page because the site you were trying to visit now blocks the Firefox browser."

The page includes the following argument: "While blanket ad blocking in general is still theft, the real problem is AdBlock Plus's unwillingness to allow individual site owners the freedom to block people using their plug-in. Blocking FireFox is the only alternative."

Palant, writing on a blog related to the project - - lashed out at those kinds of arguments.

"There is only one reliable way to make sure your ads aren't blocked - make sure the users don't want to block them," he wrote. "Don't forget about the users. Use ads in a way that doesn't degrade their experience."

For now, these issues will be debated on the fringes of the Internet. The first stage of a corporate response would be technological not legal, said Randal Picker, a University of Chicago law professor who has studied the copyright issues related to TiVo.

It is not as if television networks could change their signal to thwart TiVo, the way Web sites can use technology to complicate the filtering process, he said.

One response by Web sites would be for them "to serve ads from their own servers," Palant wrote in an e-mail message. "For them, this has the advantage that they will probably escape common filter rules, which are usually targeted at large advertising servers. However, this does not mean that you can annoy users as long as your advertisements are served from own servers, the most annoying ads usually find their way to popular filter lists."

The only large player that was willing to comment was Microsoft, which is caught in an interesting position: it is the operator of one of the largest Web sites, but also the producer of the dominant browser that is being challenged by the more flexible Firefox. Furthermore, it is in the online advertising business through its MSN portal and search functions.

In a statement, Microsoft spoke of its success in allowing third-party developers to "add value to the browser experience through the creation of add-ons."

The statement continues: "The range of add-ons available does include ad blocking software. It would not be appropriate for Microsoft to comment on the merits or demerits of a specific add-on, or group of add-ons. Provided they have not been designed with malicious intent and do not compromise a user's privacy or security, Microsoft is pleased to see new add-ons that add to the range of options that users have for customizing their browsing experience."