Recently I tried to watch some online video on a television channel's website. The video applet failed to load completely and it didn't take long for me to develop the correct suspicion. I disabled my adblocker and reloaded the page. No fucking video. So I open the page in a vanilla browser and it loads, a wild contrast from what I had, up till that point, been used to. On the vanilla browser there is a banner and large square add. Then the video starts and I am subjected to extra-loud advertising, TV style, with a vengeance. In addition to the other adds. Another advertisement plays, and a third, before my content is loaded.
Adblockers, with the advent of hijacked banner ads and unscrupulous marketing, to say nothing of the paranoid or political users of the internet, are not simply a tool entitled users employ to rid themselves of annoyances. Ad-blockers are legitimately a way of keeping your computer clean, of preventing your oft-used technological distractions from compromise. The fact you don't have to watch commercials (which are basically always: manipulative, insulting, indoctrinating or some shameful combination of all three) is an added bonus to not having your internet-accessing-device fucked with.
I am not a poweruser but I've been adblocking for years - since I discovered it was possible. I understand that advertising revenue drives some smaller sites, and, yes, I'd agree they deserve their due - assuming they police their advertisements for some level of quality. Fine, whatever, have your .005 cents per impression. You deserve it, plucky little website. However, the worst offenders are often large media sites – sometimes even those which already use paywalls. Let me present a brief overview of the galloping trend of online advertising.
In the early 90's during the second wave of the internet, when things became graphical enough that advertisement in the classic sense became possible, it was largely internet entities that advertised for themselves, and certain forward looking companies often related to the tech-sector. It was a simpler time. By late 1999 basically everyone who wasn't under a rock or a dinosaur was getting into online advertisement. 'Hey, check out our website at http://www.geocities.SonnysPizza/index.htm for some coupons' and other types of hilarity abounded. Whatever, wherever you got advertised to, it took a slice of your pitiful bandwidth and generally wasted time and resources, but you had to face it. Eventually MSN Messenger (R.I.P) becomes huge, and eventually it begins to advertise to you.
Side banner; top banner; .gif flames - all of these things were familiar. Between then and now the internet has grown up and come of age to the point where a huge section of people use it. All the troglodytes, termites, attractive well-adjusted people, and infants came out of the woodwork and the internet is full of everyone now. Whatever, other people will tell you about it, and some gigantic nerd could probably make a convincingly venomous deal about it... all I'll say is it drove a wave of advertising intensity that eventually rivaled the notorious realm of television adverts.
Fucking pop-ups were one thing, but there came layers of advertising that would jump into existence around key-words. Video sidebars that glitched out your browser and had to fling their audio payloads into your ears. 'Interactive' commercials made by committees of dullards and shills. YouTube videos became clogged with side, top, and skippable pre-video advertisements for every user account considered important enough to waste your time for their profit. What was once dumb, became even dumber, amen. So it goes, right? Absolutely. Yet there were additions to your browsers that would kill all advertising.
True to form, adblockers were free. They worked, and nobody who adopted them ever looked back. Surfing without them was like going back in time. It sucked, you were exposed to all the reprehensible shit that barely existed in your ideal internet experience. Going back to ads is like hitting yourself in the face with a shoe. Beautiful adblocking programs, released by benevolent and right-minded developers, worked on classic print ads, video ads, and even ads played in video content. It is like a magic balm that drives mosquitoes far, far away. For those who use adblockers, the internet just is that much less shitty. It's less claustrophobic and it can seem like the terminal cash-in state of the world has been opposed.
So of course, it comes to an end, by hosted content ('hosting ain't free, yo') which a profitable broadcaster puts online. Until very recently I had never been blocked for anything but geographical reasons (though nationalization of the internet is another ugly recent phenomenon) but a week or two ago I was denied a show I had been following online. I imagine in a year it will be impossible to skip video-advertisements everywhere, and only the smug power users will know what to do about it. Hopefully the same people who did the good work of blocking online advertising will keep up and their programs will not lapse into irrelevance due to some frightening and monstrous online advertising epidemic.
Because what the hell? You're running a profitable business already, and why not add some more revenue? Why not even more? Why not three advertisements every five-and-a-half minutes on video content? Why not have it be 30% louder than actual content, like on TV? Who cares is the commercial is ideologically loaded or bankrupt of all value? Who cares if it's annoying? 'I like money, gentlemen, and nobody gets a free lunch!'
A browser without an adblocker is a sign of a pitiable person trapped in the commercial arena, a hopeless square, a submissive lackadaisical fuck, a worthless shit hyperbole rapist. This is one fight the internet should not lose.
Showing posts with label Wall Street. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wall Street. Show all posts
10/16/11
Occupy Everything
It started in New York about a month ago and I was a smug bastard thinking that they were all hippies and idiots. I felt for them but on the other hand they were 'neo-hipster, marxist-lite scum' who didn't understand economics or politics. I called my sources and they told me exactly what I thought, that these people would disappear in a week if not a few days and that their incoherent protest would mean nothing. Yet the reason for this puerile protest was entirely valid and concrete. People, I thought, are either too angry or too defeated to voice their complaint precisely and effectively.
I was a little more right about that part. I've been mostly working since the protests started, I've been unable so far to attend the local protest, and I have heard only a few scattered reports and read a little about the issue since it started. But I have been paying attention. At this point, with the protests spreading and dissatisfaction being aired around the world and income equality becoming a talking point that the ignorant or hostile factions cannot slap down into silence, it seems like these protests are hopeful. They certainly point to a vitality that has belonged to lifestyle activists for the past three years and now finally belongs to everyone. In 2008 there were few protests, most of them astroturfed (and badly) or so far across the spectrum that they were close to insane, frothing rambling.
Imagine my relief when I see on the TV crowds of people of mixed ages and origins, all united, across the world, in protest against... well they're in protest against a lot of things. Mostly coming from America is the "99% rhetoric" which targets the super-wealthy and their stooges, and also the financial sector, lobbyists, and many of the other diseases of affluence that have sickened American democracy since its inception. In Canada, the branch plant of America, the protests are similar. The word 'oligarchy' is being thrown around a lot in conjunction with 'corporate' and people might understand what is meant by those words.
My hope is caused by the fact that the protests attract a good cross-section of people, and are opposed only by the ignorant or politically entrenched or apathetic. In other words this is a confrontation between a system that has succeeded only superficially and its adherents and, on the other side, the people who have been forced to subsist under that system, many of whom have suffered, many of whom have made incredible sacrifices, and many of whom have been spat on for most of (if not all of) their lives by 'the bootstrap crowd' and anybody with hard-fought comfort.
It's the age old combat between those who glean the spoils of life off the backs of those who are born into lesser stations. Has modern wage-slavery finally been unmasked? Is the structure of the world going to change? Is commodities trading going to be outlawed in favor of concrete economics? Are world governments going to concede that they have become accustomed and comfortable with oligarchy? Are America's taxpayers going to be reimbursed for the incredibly reckless and unsustainable policies of its government for the last decade? Is the financial bail-out going to be rectified? Is Greece going to be allowed to fail so that its oligarchs can be exiled in shame? Will the money system and its vice-like grip on human life and potential finally be broken? Will this be the renaissance where our species overcomes its petty tribalism and begins to plan for a great future? Or are we going to face yet another vast heartbreak that the global, soulless hive of moneyed villains will mock us about for decade after hopeless decade? Will 2011 influence the coming century? Will we be able to do great things without the deadly crutch of ideology?
It's clear to me that after this point there are a few roads: 1) the tyranny of sums and figures will continue to oppress a strained and breaking world, or 2) some type of financial civil-war will break out, or the world will begin to change for the better in a concentrated effort or 3) business as usual with slightly more awareness on the part of the populace, and increased spite and tension.
There are probably many, many more possibilities but I see the above three as the most likely. 1 and 3 resemble each other but there is a significant difference between how they might play out in terms of impact on majority politics. 2 is what might have to happen, with a large scale flight from monolithic credit systems and centralized financial power into personal and communal responsibility and smaller economic plays. World hunger is caused in part by ignorance, warfare, and politics, but when this year's crop harvest is speculated on as if the food supply is a roulette wheel for the rich, then... well what? What happens then? What has been happening for more than 20 years? Why subsidies? Why bail-outs? Why silence?
And I for one am glad that the silence has been broken, and that the clamor is spreading. And I laugh at those sneering bastards in tailored clothes, drinking champagne as they watch the under-classes raise hell. Their time will come.
I was a little more right about that part. I've been mostly working since the protests started, I've been unable so far to attend the local protest, and I have heard only a few scattered reports and read a little about the issue since it started. But I have been paying attention. At this point, with the protests spreading and dissatisfaction being aired around the world and income equality becoming a talking point that the ignorant or hostile factions cannot slap down into silence, it seems like these protests are hopeful. They certainly point to a vitality that has belonged to lifestyle activists for the past three years and now finally belongs to everyone. In 2008 there were few protests, most of them astroturfed (and badly) or so far across the spectrum that they were close to insane, frothing rambling.
Imagine my relief when I see on the TV crowds of people of mixed ages and origins, all united, across the world, in protest against... well they're in protest against a lot of things. Mostly coming from America is the "99% rhetoric" which targets the super-wealthy and their stooges, and also the financial sector, lobbyists, and many of the other diseases of affluence that have sickened American democracy since its inception. In Canada, the branch plant of America, the protests are similar. The word 'oligarchy' is being thrown around a lot in conjunction with 'corporate' and people might understand what is meant by those words.
My hope is caused by the fact that the protests attract a good cross-section of people, and are opposed only by the ignorant or politically entrenched or apathetic. In other words this is a confrontation between a system that has succeeded only superficially and its adherents and, on the other side, the people who have been forced to subsist under that system, many of whom have suffered, many of whom have made incredible sacrifices, and many of whom have been spat on for most of (if not all of) their lives by 'the bootstrap crowd' and anybody with hard-fought comfort.
It's the age old combat between those who glean the spoils of life off the backs of those who are born into lesser stations. Has modern wage-slavery finally been unmasked? Is the structure of the world going to change? Is commodities trading going to be outlawed in favor of concrete economics? Are world governments going to concede that they have become accustomed and comfortable with oligarchy? Are America's taxpayers going to be reimbursed for the incredibly reckless and unsustainable policies of its government for the last decade? Is the financial bail-out going to be rectified? Is Greece going to be allowed to fail so that its oligarchs can be exiled in shame? Will the money system and its vice-like grip on human life and potential finally be broken? Will this be the renaissance where our species overcomes its petty tribalism and begins to plan for a great future? Or are we going to face yet another vast heartbreak that the global, soulless hive of moneyed villains will mock us about for decade after hopeless decade? Will 2011 influence the coming century? Will we be able to do great things without the deadly crutch of ideology?
It's clear to me that after this point there are a few roads: 1) the tyranny of sums and figures will continue to oppress a strained and breaking world, or 2) some type of financial civil-war will break out, or the world will begin to change for the better in a concentrated effort or 3) business as usual with slightly more awareness on the part of the populace, and increased spite and tension.
There are probably many, many more possibilities but I see the above three as the most likely. 1 and 3 resemble each other but there is a significant difference between how they might play out in terms of impact on majority politics. 2 is what might have to happen, with a large scale flight from monolithic credit systems and centralized financial power into personal and communal responsibility and smaller economic plays. World hunger is caused in part by ignorance, warfare, and politics, but when this year's crop harvest is speculated on as if the food supply is a roulette wheel for the rich, then... well what? What happens then? What has been happening for more than 20 years? Why subsidies? Why bail-outs? Why silence?
And I for one am glad that the silence has been broken, and that the clamor is spreading. And I laugh at those sneering bastards in tailored clothes, drinking champagne as they watch the under-classes raise hell. Their time will come.
4/20/11
One Year Later
The sheen which developed on the waters of the Gulf of Mexico is nothing compared to the one Charlie Sheen, recent activist for mental illness, has managed to create for himself lately. Obviously the timing is off. Charlie Sheen is already in BP Oil Spill Month 5 mode, when people just sort of shrugged and the damage control had shut everyone up about talking about anything. The two situations are similar in this way.
Charlie Sheen has spilled all over pop culture while his true problems lurked under the surface of the water, disrupted by dispersants, and this has gone on for years. Then suddenly we see the pathological outbreak in a series of almost unbelievable news stories – crashed cars, threatened ex wives, domestic allegations, alleged use of substances – and it is capitalized on.
With BP and other corporate hijackers of democracy and ecology, we see the pathological behavior and wait until the moment of infamy, and then let them get away with it (since we are disenfranchised, our outrage counts for nothing anyway). One year later and the outcry is buried in new outcries. No anti-worldrapists got offended when plutocracy and capitalism eroded another massive chunk of the world. Not even Charlie had it so easy.
If only an oil spill were as profitable and easy to manage as a fame spill.
Charlie Sheen has spilled all over pop culture while his true problems lurked under the surface of the water, disrupted by dispersants, and this has gone on for years. Then suddenly we see the pathological outbreak in a series of almost unbelievable news stories – crashed cars, threatened ex wives, domestic allegations, alleged use of substances – and it is capitalized on.
With BP and other corporate hijackers of democracy and ecology, we see the pathological behavior and wait until the moment of infamy, and then let them get away with it (since we are disenfranchised, our outrage counts for nothing anyway). One year later and the outcry is buried in new outcries. No anti-worldrapists got offended when plutocracy and capitalism eroded another massive chunk of the world. Not even Charlie had it so easy.
If only an oil spill were as profitable and easy to manage as a fame spill.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)