Reply to post: Guilt? At not seeing ads?

Forgive me, father, for I have used an ad-blocker on news websites...

Joe Gurman

Guilt? At not seeing ads?

Are you effin' serious? I believe the correct response, to quote the film version of The Man Who Would Be King, is, "Not bloody likely."

If adverts were no more obnoxious, either in appearance or by giving evidence of slurping and sharing personal information, than newspaper ads; if ads did not therefore follow me from site to site, even if I only visited site A once in six months; if ads actually tried to sell me something rather than serving as a way for tracking my surfing habits.... maybe.

As it is, I pay for ("subscribe to") to major US news outlets' online presence, instead of seeing ads. Through Patreon, I also pay for content on a couple of much lower budget sites. My conscience is clean, mate.

And in answer to the most obvious question, yes, I'd pay a quid or so a month to keep reading The Reg. There's nothing immoral about partial paywalls in return for spyware-free viewing. And make no mistake: that's what online ads are, spyware.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019