---
# System prepended metadata

title: Ad-Blocking
tags: [COMM1255]

---

# Ad Blocking

## Installing U-Block Origin

In addition to the before and after screenshots for [speedtest.net](speedtest.net) I am also sharing my filter list because I use filters in addition to those that are default with uBlock Origin.

![Filter List](https://hackmd.io/_uploads/HypgGjy1A.png)
![Ad-blocker Before](https://hackmd.io/_uploads/SJezGiyJC.png)
![Ad-blocker After](https://hackmd.io/_uploads/HkOzGjJJ0.png)

## Reading Response

What if limiting the ability of advertisers to track their audience is better for the publisher and advertiser? This dilemma is proposed by Don Marti in his article "Targeted Advertising Considered Harmful". He proposes that on the per user basis targeted advertising is better for the advertiser, however on a more macro scale targeted advertising leads users to develop a filter towards ads as well as look down on targeted ones. This idea stems from the concept of Signaling. The benefit of an advertiser spending millions of dollars on a Super Bowl ad is more than exposing their brand to millions of individuals. It legitimizes the company because a rational consumer would assume that a company which has a large enough advertising budget to run an ad in the super bowl will have a good product because their product must have sold a lot originally. Targeted advertising takes away from this because the consumer does not know if they are one of the few who received the ad or if it is more generally targeted. Marti predicts that as anti tracking software becomes more prevalent that credibility will come back to advertising which will be better for the publisher as well as the consumer. 



The purpose of advertising to lend credibility to  a brand had never occurred to me but as I begin to reflect on the article I realized it is something that I do subconsciously. I heavily employ ad-blockers myself meaning that I experience very few to no ads banner ads, but when I do come across a website where some ads get through it seemingly cheapens the product for me because it is a cheap method of advertising. This same attitude applies to SPAM emails. In a previous response I have reflected on how I find ads from social media personalities to be more engaging. This could be an affect of seemingly higher effort advertising. Influencer marketing requires brands to specifically seek out ambassadors who they believe could be effective for their product. This concept runs parallel to what is discussed in the article. While this advertising is targeted, it also requires effort on the part of the advertising company and therefore is more respected. That being said, the article emphasizes how the advertising landscape changes overtime and that is no different for influencer advertising. Overtime there have been many companies that advertise widely across Youtube but have widely criticized products ([Air Up](https://www.wired.com/review/air-up-water-bottle/), [Established Titles](https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/youtube-creators-established-titles-sponsorship-controversy-rcna59518), etc.). Overtime as there are more low quality products advertised through this method influencer advertising may begin to lose its novel shine. 

