alt Hacker NewsIf you’ve visited any of these sites recently it’s obvious that part of the issue is that you’re bombarded with pops, ads everywhere, autoplaying video, etc. It’s nauseating and a horrible user experience. If all I’m looking for is straightforward content/info then I’m naturally using the most efficient way to get that content/information and visiting a website is not the most efficient way anymore
Replies
These news sites run ads that are borderline gore, disturbing images promoting snake oil weight loss or skin care treatments, and wonder why nobody wants to click into their site.
It's a downward spiral. As views start to decline there's more pressure to make money from the views that remain.
Is anyone here actually browsing the internet without ad-blockers?
As soon as I accidentally turn them off I am disgusted by the consumerist, snake-oil, sexist, shit-storm that's advertisement.
Every time I visit the FT, the experience is reasonable enough.
Weren't those ads always there, though? The most obvious change is that a little AI popup appears on Google search providing a brief (even if hallucinated) overview of what the user queried.
Unrelated, but I wouldn't expect this take on HN where I assumed everyone knew what an ad-blocker was.
So, Google promotes the enshittification you decry by monopolizing the way you make money on the internet. Then also Google cripples everyone’s ad-dependent business by sucking out the info these websites provide and have paid people to research and publish. Nonetheless, Google good, websites bad.
Infinite Jest describes a very similar (fictional) development, albeit with network TV. As viewers leave, content producers are ever-more desperate to monetize remaining traffic, which worsens the experience and drives more viewers away, creating even more desperation to monetize... a vicious cycle.