---
# System prepended metadata

title: Matt's Ad Blocking Practical

---

# Matt's Ad Blocking Practical

### Before UBlock Origin:

![Before](https://i.imgur.com/o8EWDqd.png[/img])


### After UBlock Origin:

![image alt](https://i.imgur.com/lMZWOb4.png[/img])

I definitely noticed that sites loaded faster with UBlock on, and I found I was able to more efficiently read web pages without the insistent distraction of attention-hungry banner ads, pop ups, and floating ads. While this no-ad system makes it easier to interact with the content I intend to, if every individual blocked all ads it would create a problem in which ad-supported free content would not be sustainable. Free sites may have to implement pay walls or, if no users are willing to pay for previously free content, shut down entirely. As I argued in a prior reading response, ads are not inherently bad and, while they may be annoying, they allow us to have easy, unpaid access to lots of online content. However, I still believe that users should be able to deny permission to be tracked by ad servers. 

Rather than moving towards ad blockers, users who are bothered by tracking should be encouraged to activate tracking protection as discussed by [Marti](https://zgp.org/targeted-advertising-considered-harmful/) in "Targeted Advertising Considered Harmful." In this way, users would be able to browse the Web without being tracked across sites by third-party ad servers. Users would still be shown ads, and therefore tracking protection would not be a detriment to advertisers as ad blockers would. However, these ads would be relevant to the content on the page rather retargetted based on a user's previous online behavior. Marti explains that this makes ads more meaningful to viewers and increases their signaling power as long as users know they are not targeted, which the user of tracking protection would know. Ad "blockers" like [AdBlock Plus](https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/13/12890050/adblock-plus-now-sells-ads) that allow some ads through their filter, as long as they are deemed acceptable and as long as advertisers pay the blocker, are after their own profit and do not offer the best solution to users. While ads may be more in line with the page's content, this is the same effect that tracking protection would have. Furthermore, the model is susceptible to corruption in which unrelated ads eventually get through the filter for high prices, creating a similar environment to the pre-blocker Web except with another middle-man seeking to profit. Therefore, the best solution for those who are bothered by ad tracking but enjoy free ad-supported content is to implement tracking protection. 

Unfortunately this does not provide a solution for users like myself who are not really bothered by tracking but would simply prefer to view web pages for free and without ads, as UBlock allows. I suppose we are instead forced to accept that we have to allow ads on our pages if we want to continue to enjoy the benefits of ad-supported content. Although as ads lose their impact and users develop "banner blindness," a term coined by Betsy Haibel and quoted by Marti to describe users gradually tuning out constant online ads, even this system people like myself now take for granted may need alterations. 