Adblockalypse Affects Mobile Devices

The ongoing fierce battle between media and advertisers on one side and users on the other regarding content monetization and ad display has been brought to a boiling point in recent years by the emergence and rapid popularity of ad blockers. This ‘invention’ generously blocks annoying ads while surfing the internet, seemingly turning the tide of war strongly in favor of internet users who consider free consumption of others’ work as their inalienable human right, but are unwilling to endure any ads, let alone pay for access to the respective content. Media, which have been trying for decades to find a sustainable business model, are in the most difficult position, caught between spoiled users unwilling to pay and the expensive production of any quality content, and now they also face the problem of ad display. What is most tragic is that, in most cases, these ads, even when they clutter the page and attack the user from all angles, do not even come close to covering the media’s costs.

Everything on the internet is, in fact, cheap or free, except for content creation, which has remained in the ‘old economy’ where work is paid for, and good work is well paid. Before the emergence of this simple and revolutionary invention, advertisers were winning, and users were forced to endure more or less aggressive advertising if they wanted to use certain content. However, this has drastically changed recently, leading to an unexpected escalation of relations between users and media. Once willing to jump through hoops for every click, content producers have since taken a much more confident stance and are now increasingly openly blocking access to their content, either fully or partially, until the ad blocker is turned off. As the saying goes, the emperor has reached the wall. Although, technically speaking, the issue is resolved, such confrontation between users and media, or content producers, is not sustainable in the long run, but no more pleasant solution is currently offered.

User rejection harms media and advertisers, while on the other hand, those who stubbornly refuse to allow advertising are slowly but surely narrowing their options. Established brands that offer hard-to-replace content or services are in a far better negotiating position than those who must fight for clicks and users in a sea of similar competition.

For example, Forbes can afford to openly block access to anyone with an ad blocker enabled, just as Bloomberg can afford to gently warn users about the activated ad blocker and suggest turning it off to avoid issues with optimal content display. Lesser-known players cannot afford this as they risk a massive drop in traffic on their sites. The fact that free blocking software is becoming increasingly efficient and skilled at locating and ‘destroying’ ads with maximum ease of installation (practically one click and the ads are gone) only complicates this new battlefield in the war between digital media and users. No matter how aggressive and annoying the ads are, they at least partially financially cover what users are unwilling to cover themselves, and given that there is currently no other way, this makes them unavoidable and perfectly necessary. Without them, media content on the internet becomes more or less impossible or is reduced to minimal and low-quality service.

It is not hard to assume that for users, it is a miraculous gift from heaven; ad blockers are spreading like wildfire. According to data from Adobe and Pagefair.com (a startup that helps advertisers fight against ad blockers) from last year, 198 million people use ad-blocking software, which is a 41 percent increase compared to the previous year, and translated into money, this means that $21.8 billion in global advertising revenue was blocked just last year. The struggle continues with mobile devices, where advertisers and media had an advantage until recently due to a much lower level of ad blocker development, but that has also changed. Apple, the dominant force in the mobile industry, opened wide the doors for ad blockers in its internet browser Safari with the introduction of the iOS9 operating system (now outdated) and thus began to dismantle the remaining bastion of resistance (this accounts for more than half of all mobile internet users in the world). Soon, easy ad blocking was enabled both in mobile browsers and within applications. A new Pagefair report on mobile trends from March of this year confirms this, showing that 22 percent of smartphone users blocked ads (419 million people), with a growing trend.

Blocked content varies depending on the software used; some ad blockers eliminate all ads on a page, while others, for example, target elements that infringe on user privacy. Most currently block irritating ads like the infamous pop-ups and banners, but interestingly, Google Adwords ads are often allowed because the software considers them useful, as well as because in some cases Google has paid the software creators. Ad blockers work by tracking content on the internet browser once the user downloads and installs them, analyzing it, and comparing it to a list of pages designated for blocking. In principle, an ad blocker either completely stops communication with the servers that send ads (domains and subdomains) or hides certain elements on the page (HTML code), even if they are loaded. Simply put, the software uses filters, lists, with which it compares each page and its elements and blocks the execution of those found in the filter. On Safari, however, the software is even more efficient as it processes the list of prohibited content before the page loads, which means much faster page loading than usual (burdened with ads), and thus greater appeal for users. The software is, in short, generally very effective and now covers almost all forms of internet content consumption, so the growing panic in the advertising and media industry is not surprising.

Lines are tightening, and the uncomfortable problem is being discussed most seriously, although the proposed solutions do not seem overly convincing at this point. Directly blocking those who block is not a sustainable solution for most; it is more of a means of pressure and discouragement for users. More subtle solutions, however, instill even less confidence. Among the more mentioned are better ad targeting (to specific groups) and personalized marketing (to individuals), however, user tolerance for ads is very low, ads are often insufficiently well-targeted, and privacy issues are also a concern. Introducing content charges has long been problematic; some succeed, many do not, and this model has only recently begun to slowly ‘take hold’ with users, who are still largely unwilling to pay for anything. The right solution does not currently exist, and perhaps it will not come quickly, if ever. The greatest irony is that payment and ad haters do not realize that their habits are destroying the services and sites they likely care about, as well as the ‘free internet’ as a whole. They will realize this when it is too late.