Recommended Posts

Quote

Who is peeking over your shoulder while you work, watch videos, learn, explore, and shop on the internet? Enter the address of any website, and Blacklight will scan it and reveal the specific user-tracking technologies on the site—and who’s getting your data. You may be surprised at what you learn.

 

https://themarkup.org/blacklight?url=www.neowin.net

 

Quote

21 Ad trackers found on this site.This is triple the average of seven that we found on popular sites.

49 Third-party cookies were found.This is more than the average of three that we found on popular sites.

 

This is ridiculous guys. This is just more fuel for ad blocking this site.

Edited by Xilo

I always block third party cookies in any browser I use. I do have neowin added to my trusted sites in ublock origin and it's the ONLY site I do that with. They have to make money some how.

 

Never heard of that site you linked to, but will have to use it to check out other sites.

I don't know what they consider a "popular" website, but I tested a handful of other tech websites I'd consider popular, and they all have the same or more ad trackers (though some have fewer cookies). Either way, I'm not sure this is a completely reliable tool.

  • Like 2

Let's compare it to another popular tech site

 

SNAG-0003.png

 

To be fair lets compare it to another tech website like Neowin

 

SNAG-0004.png

 

So the question remains, what sites are doing "3x less" trackers? We also have a fully configurable opt in/out for cookies privacy at the bottom right of the page.

 

Fact remains, people aren't running this website out of their own pockets we rely on advertising, and yes we also rely on Google analytics so we don't have to spend money on resource intensive things like webalizer and such like, we even offset the site staff email to GSuite so we don't have to run an email server.

 

Last comparison:

 

SNAG-0005.png

 

Even the mighty BBC is comparable to ours.

 

I also want to add that "popular" sites like facebook and google do not rely on 3rd party advertisers at all.. but that still does not mean your browsing with them is private.. so factor that in with the comparisons as well.

4 minutes ago, indospot said:

I don't know what they consider a "popular" website, but I tested a handful of other tech websites I'd consider popular, and they all have the same or more ad trackers (though some have fewer cookies). Either way, I'm not sure this is a completely reliable tool.

I tested several popular gaming websites. Destructoid for instance has 0 ad trackers, and only 3 third party cookies.

Just now, Steven P. said:

Let's compare it to another popular tech site

 

SNAG-0003.png

 

To be fairlets compare it to another tech website like Neowin

 

SNAG-0004.png

 

So the question remains, what sites are doing "3x less" trackers? We also have a fully configurable opt in/out for cookies privacy at the bottom right of the page.

 

Fact remains, people aren't running this website out of their own pockets we rely on advertising, and yes we also rely on Google analytics so we don't have to spend money on resource intensive things like webalizer and such like, we even offset the site staff email to GSuite so we don't have to run an email server.

 

Last comparison:

 

SNAG-0005.png

 

Even the mighty BBC is comparable to ours.

 

 

Just because other tech sites have the same problem, doesn't mean your site should. This is average across all sites people have submitted. If everyone jumped off a bridge, would you?

 

2 minutes ago, Xilo said:

I tested several popular gaming websites. Destructoid for instance has 0 ad trackers, and only 3 third party cookies.

Just because other tech sites have the same problem, doesn't mean your site should. This is average across all sites people have submitted. If everyone jumped off a bridge, would you?

Can you tell me how I would otherwise pay for the running costs then? Would you be prepared to buy an ad free subscription, like so many others aren't?

 

I think if we're along the same lines as the BBC which is part publically funded and also under UK government scrutiny, I sdon't think we look bad at all compared to windowscentral, which has 3x more advertiser tracking cookies and double the amount of trackers.

  • Steven P. changed the title to Neowin trackers and 3rd party cookies

I changed the misleading title, but I consider this topic asked and answered.

 

For openness I saved what the title used to be which was very misleading and untrue compared to our own sector of websites.

 

SNAG-0006.png

1 minute ago, Steven P. said:

 

Can you tell me how I would otherwise pay for the running costs then? Would you be prepared to buy an ad free subscription, like so many others aren't?

If you've struggled with the same problem for years, maybe it's time to rethink what you're doing? Getting rid of all the political BS would be a good start.

 

News sites are the worst for trackers and cookies though.

3 minutes ago, spikey_richie said:

You may have just guilt-tripped me into a sub @Steven P.

Well to be honest not ad blocking is just as good :)

 

I feel like if a person is posting about the amount of third party advertiser cookies then they are already blocking them and just posting this to justify their position, when what we are doing is actually perfectly normal across the web.

 

The Privacy tool isn't there for nothing, it serves a function too.

  • Like 1

My own site rates similar to Neowin and I'm mainly using Google Analytics, Google AdSense and Skimlinks. Compared to some sites in 2020 I think that's quite acceptable.

 

Its a double edged sword unfortunately, I can't say i'm 100% ok with the amount of data the likes of Google track. However the trade off is this allows many sites / communities to become self sufficient and freely available for anyone to access.

28 minutes ago, shockz said:

Do you see the data collected by third party? Or is it just sent over without any additional review?

I'm not sure how we can review all the data that's sent over. 

 

If you're curious as to the information collected, you can check it all out in the privacy options 😊

42 minutes ago, Biscuits Brown said:

Something must be wrong with that site because Google, Facebook and Twitter are suspiciously low to zero trackers or third party cookies. I find THAT hard to believe.

I think you'll find that the larger website won't have to rely on 3rd party services at all, if anything they are collecting the data themselves and then selling it to 3rd parties, and no I'm not being paranoid, that's exactly what companies like Facebook and Google are there for, data collection.

 

Part of the concern by the OP is actually the sort of data it sells like web analytics, it is free to Neowin so long as we're okay with Google using the data themselves such as where the hit came from, how many pages were hit, etc exactly the same data as webalizer would collect locally but nowadays you can't even get approved to review hardware without sharing some traffic data.

48 minutes ago, Steven P. said:

I think you'll find that the larger website won't have to rely on 3rd party services at all, if anything they are collecting the data themselves and then selling it to 3rd parties, and no I'm not being paranoid, that's exactly what companies like Facebook and Google are there for, data collection.

 

Part of the concern by the OP is actually the sort of data it sells like web analytics, it is free to Neowin so long as we're okay with Google using the data themselves such as where the hit came from, how many pages were hit, etc exactly the same data as webalizer would collect locally but nowadays you can't even get approved to review hardware without sharing some traffic data.

I don't know. Microsoft, Oracle and CNN were loaded with trackers and 3rd party cookies and I'd consider them 'larger' sites.  Still think somethings off if Facebook.com has zero trackers and on 3rd party cookie. 

11 minutes ago, Biscuits Brown said:

I don't know. Microsoft, Oracle and CNN were loaded with trackers and 3rd party cookies and I'd consider them 'larger' sites.  Still think somethings off if Facebook.com has zero trackers and on 3rd party cookie. 

it probably can't detect the trackers and such from Facebook because you have to be logged in for them to be active.

3 minutes ago, Brandon H said:

it probably can't detect the trackers and such from Facebook because you have to be logged in for them to be active.

It does track without a login. It's one of the central complaints about Facebook trackers. Anytime you see a Facebook share or like button on a site, or a pixel embed, it's tracking that user, whether or not they even use Facebook or not. 

I think that everyone is overlooking one simple thing: anywhere you go, you are tracked by something, a cookie, a script, etc. If you don't like it, don't visit the site, I think that it is fairly simple. Neowin has been a site I have used for years, and I do not worry about being tracked, why should I? I'm not doing anything illicit or illegal, so why do I care if a site can tell what I was looking at, what are they going to do with the data, besides the fact that the amount of data that a website would receive in 24 hours would be allot! I really doubt that the website owners/operators have the time to sift through all the collected data!

  • Like 2
  • Facepalm 1
16 hours ago, shockz said:

It does track without a login. It's one of the central complaints about Facebook trackers. Anytime you see a Facebook share or like button on a site, or a pixel embed, it's tracking that user, whether or not they even use Facebook or not. 

I'm just talking about the facebook.com main page though; I doubt there are trackers/ad-cookies on the login page which is where that scanner would be probing. That's just my thought on why it "appears" to be so low according to that scanner site.

 

I don't disagree with you about facebook's trackers on other sites, they're worse than Google IMO with the amount of tracking they do. Heck I'd take Chinese tracking over Facebook's lol

On 27/10/2020 at 03:22, Xilo said:

If you've struggled with the same problem for years, maybe it's time to rethink what you're doing? Getting rid of all the political BS would be a good start.

 

News sites are the worst for trackers and cookies though.

Not everyone feels that way with the political topics. They are also only available to members and even then people aren't forced to read those threads.

 

I pay for a subscription due to those topics and the funny pictures threads. I doubt I would pay just for the tech articles as Neowin doesn't offer anything that several other tech sites don't offer.

The forums with the various and wide ranging topics are what makes this place worthwhile for me. Just my opinion.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!