Sen. Ron Wyden calls for an investigation of the ad-blocking industry:
On Tuesday, one of the Senate's fiercest tech critics, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), called on regulators requesting that they investigate the ad-blocking industry for anti-competitive behavior.
For years now, some of the largest tech firms have paid ad-blocking companies like Eyeo, which owns Adblock Plus, to avoid the software's restrictions and have their ads displayed on devices. In 2015, a report from the Financial Times showed that companies like Microsoft, Amazon, and Google were paying out ad blockers so that they could be added to a whitelist to avoid the software's filters.
In a letter to the Federal Trade Commission, Wyden outlined this behavior and asked Chairman Joseph Simons to open an investigation into the entire ad-blocking industry as a response. Wyden argued that any company that accepts payment to be whitelisted should be "far more transparent" about the process with its users.
In the case of Adblock Plus, the company announced in 2016 that it would be accepting some ads that weren't "intrusive or annoying." The company whitelists these acceptable ads and allows them to run on devices, but Wyden argues that this behavior is "anti-competitive.
The FTC confirmed that it had received the letter.
Related Stories
Microsoft has spent a lot of time and energy over the last few months adding generative AI features to all its products, particularly its long-standing, long-struggling Bing search engine. And now the company is working on fusing this fast-moving, sometimes unsettling new technology with some old headaches: ads.
In a blog post earlier this week, Microsoft VP Yusuf Mehdi said the company was "exploring placing ads in the chat experience," one of several things the company is doing "to share the ad revenue with partners whose content contributed to the chat response." The company is also looking into ways to let Bing Chat show sources for its work, sort of like the ways Google, Bing, and other search engines display a source link below snippets of information they think might answer the question you asked.
Related:
Even the FBI Says You Should Use an Ad Blocker (20221227)
Microsoft Explores a Potentially Risky New Market (20220420)
Microsoft is Testing Ads in the Windows 11 File Explorer (20220314)
Sen. Ron Wyden Calls for an Investigation of the Ad-Blocking Industry (20200115)
Windows 10 App Starts Showing Ads, Microsoft Says You Can't Remove Them (20191215)
Microsoft Experiments with Ads in Windows Email (20181117)
(Score: 5, Insightful) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Thursday January 16 2020, @03:38AM (2 children)
All ads are equal to me and they compete equally for my attention - I block them all. No whitelist.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 16 2020, @03:55AM (1 child)
All ads are equal to me and they compete equally for my attention - I block them all.
That makes you an "equal opportunity ads consumer", right?
(Score: 3, Touché) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Thursday January 16 2020, @06:24AM
Yep. And proud of it.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 16 2020, @04:38AM (2 children)
Always seemed like an extortion scam to me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 16 2020, @04:58AM
What do you think about their plans to get in on the micro-payment game? Now they can track their users, sell the information to others, and force publishers to go along with it or get no money.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 16 2020, @07:54AM
"Nice web-browser you have there! Be a shame if something were to happen to it! Maybe we could handle it for you, if youse were to let a few ads from our "associates" through, and everything will be alright. Whadda ya say? We paint houses, too. "
(Score: 5, Interesting) by petecox on Thursday January 16 2020, @07:52AM (5 children)
Electricity to run a data centre, CPU activity required to interpret Javascript.
And all that to encourage us to buy shit we don't need.
Whitelist ads only from companies that are carbon negative.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 16 2020, @11:31AM (2 children)
So carbon negative and poisoning the rivers with cyanide is ok then?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 16 2020, @01:25PM (1 child)
My guess is you will not find such a company, but go ahead and try.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Ethanol-fueled on Thursday January 16 2020, @07:28PM
Cyanide is used in electroplating, and there are a shit-load of companies that do this. Odds are at least a few of them, even in America, have dumped and not been caught for it.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Mer on Thursday January 16 2020, @04:14PM (1 child)
Do carbon negative companies even exist or are they just a publicity stunt? From what I understand the companies trying to brag this way:
>only count their factories/transit emissions, not the breathing of their employees, the power in their offices and the various activities of their subcontractors
>compensate by planting trees and calculating how much carbon a tree could capture in his lifetime even though the tree just got planted
>don't even plant the tree themselves, just send off money to some organization that may or may not be embezzling as some kind of advertising expense
The extra steps make it so even if I try to verify I never end up totally sure they're doing it right.
Shut up!, he explained.
(Score: 2) by dry on Friday January 17 2020, @02:43AM
The employee breathing is carbon neutral, good points about the other stuff.
(Score: 3, Informative) by cmdrklarg on Thursday January 16 2020, @04:23PM (6 children)
That is why I no longer run AdBlock Plus. uBlock Origin FTW!
I have systematically removed ads from everywhere I can. I've even stopped watching the NFL as you're watching a goddamn ad half the time.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Thursday January 16 2020, @07:56PM (5 children)
I'm starting to doubt even uBlock Origin. I run it and I'm starting to see more and more ads on sites where it previously worked. It's reached the point where I have to use Block Element all the goddamn time.
Because everytime I go to a new website I want to spend half an hour clicking to allow the page while more and more ads pop up recursively just so I can get basic site functionality, or doing exhaustive trial-and-error and research trying to decide what I can and can't block to retain that functionality. And the sites that do that crap are ones modern people need for their livelihood so I can't just ignore them.
Oddly enough, one site where uBlock works flawlessly is a popular site for streaming NFL and other sports games. All you have to do is click the "X" on the top-center white banner and you have a flawlessly unobstructed view of a smooth HD stream. And hopefully the rest of the season will be worth watching now that the Patriots are out. I don't have a problem with being patriotic, but I do have a problem with one team winning too goddamn much.
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Thursday January 16 2020, @10:31PM (3 children)
I do actually use NoScript as well. Like you, it annoys me to have to unblock scripts needed to run a site, but to me it is worth the trouble. Now, if I find a site has too many items that are being blocked? Well, then I reconsider whether I really need to use that site.
When I stopped getting cable TV, I ended up having to give up NFL football, and I find that I don't miss it at all. I did notice that the Vikings made it to the playoffs and even won a game, but as typical they choked. It is highly unlikely that I will pay any attention to the Stupor Bowl either, unless I get invited to a party or something (not very likely).
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 2) by dwilson on Friday January 17 2020, @03:36AM (2 children)
I switched from NoScript to uMatrix (same author as uBlock). More or less the same functionality, but I found it much easier to use and modify site-by-site.
- D
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 20 2020, @12:21PM (1 child)
It's the same author as uBlock Origin not Ublock. They are not the same, make sure you are using uBlock Origin!
(Score: 2) by dwilson on Tuesday January 21 2020, @03:56PM
I did mean uBlock Origin. uBlock is no better than AdBlock as far as allowing paid ad's, and the difference is so well known that I had understood uBlock to be synonymous with uBlock Origin unless specified otherwise.
- D
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 20 2020, @12:29PM
Whenever I have had this in uBlock Origin I have gone into the settings and updated all the filters. This usually fixes whatever the change was from the host.
The filters are user contributed and updated regularly.
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Thursday January 16 2020, @08:50PM (3 children)
I use NoScript. which is not an "ad blocker". Yes, it blocks adds but that is not it's main purpose.
it is intended to prevent any JavaScript from running in my browser that I don't expressly approve, nothing more.
Too bad for the advertisers that all their adds require javascript, if they served up static jpgs I'd probably actually see more of their stuff just fine.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 20 2020, @12:24PM (2 children)
Stop living in 2012 and replace NoScript with uBlock Origin. It does what NoScript does but with a lot more functions and control.
It amazes me how people still brag on about Adblock, Adblock Plus, NoScript and Ghostery like they are so smart. Get with the times people!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 20 2020, @12:27PM (1 child)
Woops I meant replace it with uMatrix. Both uBlock Origin and uMatrix work well together and are made by the same author.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 26 2020, @04:56AM
I was about to say.. NoScript functionality is just part of what uMatrix does.
Until Chrome blocks this kind of extension that is.