Advertisers can pay AdBlock Plus to look the other way

Evan Dashevsky

@haldash Jul 8, 2013 9:53 AMprint

http://www.techhive.com/article/2043847/advertisers-can-pay-adblock-plus-to-look-the-other-way.html

Color me disillusioned. First, US representative Anthony Weiner uses Twitter as his own personal Chatroulette and then Lance Armstrong admits that he got some help from science in order to win all the Tour de Frances. And now we find that AdBlock Plus (ABP), the popular ad-blocking browser extension, allows advertisers such as Google to pay to get their ads “whitelisted.”

Nothing is sacred.

Who watches the gatekeepers?

ABP is a browser extension available on Firefox (where the company claims it is the browser’s most used and downloaded extension) as well as Chrome, Opera, and Android, though it is not available via Google Play as Mountain View claims the software interferes “with another service or product in an unauthorized manner.” The popular open source software gives users the ability to block “banners, pop-ups and video ads”—but not all ads are treated equally.

As early as 2011, ABP has allowed specific ads to be “whitelisted” under certain conditions, meaning that they will be able to pass through unblocked under the software’s default settings. (Users have the option to block all ads in the extension’s settings.

According to the company, ABP allows these “non-intrusive” ads so websites can sustain themselves with ad-supported revenue. In order to be included on ABP’s acceptable list, ads must adhere to a number of attributes such as not including animation, sound, or attention-grabbing images. If a website feels their paid ad content falls under these acceptable attributes, they can be ask to be whitelisted via a web form for free.

Sounds fair. However, the Internet has been bubbling with the realization that AdBlock allows “larger properties” to pay to have their ads whitelisted, a system explained by the company:

Whitelisting is free for all small websites and blogs. However, managing this list requires significant effort on our side and this task cannot be completely taken over by volunteers as it happens with common filter lists. That’s why we are being paid by some larger properties that serve nonintrusive advertisements that want to participate in the Acceptable Ads initiative.

We have reached out to ABP for further comment. For their part, the company has been fairly transparent with the process. However, Google is a multi-national entitity that makes most of its revenue through advertising. It would make sense for them to want to encourage the free flow of text-based Google ads, and when possible, discourage competition. Their financial influence over the popular ad gatekeeper could give them an unfair advantage over smaller companies that may want to break into the ad game.

A cynic might resign themselves to the fact that the system is inherently uneven and tilted towards whoever is currently on the throne, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t strive to keep things fair.

http://theunhivedmind.com/wordpress3/2013/07/09/adblock-plus-accept-bribes-to-look-the-other-way/

Halvor says:

July 9, 2013 at 3:48 pm

Also, I just experienced that when I want to go to rt.com AdBlock Plus intervenes with the following: “It seems you meant bt.com. Do you want Adblock Plus to protect you from malicious websites?”

theunhivedmind says:

July 9, 2013 at 4:45 pm

I suggest you do not use these types of extensions because as we see from this article there is tom foolery going on and sometimes you lose things which you may have wanted to see. Unless an extension is truly independent and not doing the above then what is the point? Are you surprised that RT would be suffering this? Anywhere you get better information from, can and will be end up being targeted.

-= The Unhived Mind