AdBlock Plus: Only 9.5 percent of advertisers that apply are whitelisted

A few months ago, it was reported that the Internet adblocking service AdBlock Plus was being paid by Google so that its ads would be whitelisted from its software. While AdBlock Plus never confirmed or denied that specific report, today it did reveal some new information on just how many advertising companies are whitelisted by the service.

In a blog post, Adblock Plus' Ben Williams stated that since 2011, the service has received 777 applications from advertisers that want to be whitelisted. Of that number, just 9.5 percent were accepted. While many of them are turned down because there's a "good amount of fake applications or communication breakdowns," Williams says that more than 50 percent of the advertisers simply do not wish to conform to AdBlock Plus' own guidelines for reaching "whitelist" status.

That basically means that Internet ads with some kind of tracking, whether it is via cookies, IP addresses or some other method, violate the rules of AdBlock Plus. Williams says, "We're serious about upholding them, and we don't make exceptions." Of those advertisers that do manage to get through the process, 90 percent of them don't have to pay to be whitelisted.

Internet ads also continue to evolve, especially as more and more people access websites via mobile devices. Williams says, "Stopping annoying ads is indeed a start, but unless the Internet dies tomorrow we're ready to do a whole lot more."

Source: AdBlock Plus

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

YouTube app woes continue for Windows Phone users

Next Story

Radeon R9 270X and Radeon R7 260X Review

29 Comments

View more comments

Ads only become profitable when there is tracking to identify the user and advertise something they might actually be interested in. Stupid idea. AdBlock from the Chrome store is much better anyway.

"Of that number, just 9.5 percent were accepted. While many of them are turned down because there's a "good amount of fake applications or communication breakdowns," Williams says that more than 50 percent of the advertisers simply do not wish to confirm to AdBlock Plus' own guidelines for reaching "whitelist" status."
In other words: only 9.5 percent of advertisers were ready to pay up the extortion fees demanded by ABP for letting their ads appear.

Time to outlaw ad blockers and sue the most hypocrite of them, ABP, to hell.

felrefordit said,

Time to outlaw ad blockers and sue the most hypocrite of them, ABP, to hell.

Time to outlaw people on the internet because someone did something you didn't like

Or how about a website that displays no content if it detects adblock? I'm paying for bandwidth. You can go to hell if you're that uptight about seeing a banner ad.

tommywilde said,
Or how about a website that displays no content if it detects adblock? I'm paying for bandwidth. You can go to hell if you're that uptight about seeing a banner ad.

The adblocking user would just go to another site with similar content.

tommywilde said,
Or how about a website that displays no content if it detects adblock? I'm paying for bandwidth. You can go to hell if you're that uptight about seeing a banner ad.

There are sites that do this or similar. I've come across them and I instantly hit the "Back" button and never go back.

tommywilde said,
Or how about a website that displays no content if it detects adblock? I'm paying for bandwidth. You can go to hell if you're that uptight about seeing a banner ad.

Or how about you put a donate button on your site, if your site is worthy of a donation then people will donate, your site is not special there is most likely a 1000 other sites like yours and/or better.

We all pay for bandwidth dude.

I think a more telling statistic would be what percentage of ads that would normally be blocked were served up by those 9.5% of advertisers. That would really show how badly this white list affects users.

I use Adblock. I've never really looked but what's the difference between this and the plus variant?

SK[ said,]I use Adblock. I've never really looked but what's the difference between this and the plus variant?

I'm guessing you are on Chrome/chromium. Adblock (without the plus) is simply an ad blocking extension made by a different developer.

It's a case of "BFD." It tells you what it's doing up front, and it's one toggle to disable the whitelisted bits, a whole 0.5 seconds of your life. The guy does have to pay for bandwidth and all.

I never checked, but as long as they're trying to improve the internet for us, I don't see why people should hate ABP....

No ads means a lot of services we take for granted go behind a paywall or just quit.

And no, if I had to pay a couple of bucks a month for each and every website I visit, I need to be a multi-millionaire.

I've noticed that auto updates from ad block plus on chrome seem to allow youtube to play ads. Their solution uninstall and reinstall then untick the whitelist thing. Seems somewhat sketchy that the browser owned by the company who gave them a ton of money to do this breaks the autoupdate.

I turn off auto-update for Adblock upon installing it incase they try to auto-update and enable the "non-instrusive advertising" on me without my knowledge after I've disabled it already. I don't trust them but it's still a solid extension.

I just use a hosts file. That way the content is blocked across anything on my computer, even if it doesn't have an extension installed

Same. Got tired of websites complaining I have an adblocker, or having sh*t I don't trust not blacklisted by default. Plus even though I mainly use IE, I also use FX and Chrome(Iron) quite often.
If I have to co-manage my own list, why not start at the root... hosts

Commenting is disabled on this article.