I won’t argue. It’s your opinion and I’m one who believes you have the right to it. Of course I think you are being unrealistic, and similarly I have a right to that opinion, but they are both opinions and nothing to *fight* over, right?

@Myk: Are there ads in the books you read?

Yes, they are called “Magazines.”

The irony is that I was just yesterday researching advertising in magazines and found research on magazine.org that shows all the stats show that many magazine readers view the advertisments as an important component of the magazine, especially when those ads are targetted to the readership.

@I don´t like ads in my TV-Series. That´s why I buy the DVDs. I don´t like to sit through half an hour of commercials before a movie starts, that´s why I buy a DVD.

You are comparing apples and oranges in many ways. I can tell you dislike the ads simply because you are predisposed to dislike them, but many people dislike them, like me, because TV ads significant impose on their time. Blog ads are much less intrusive than that and (with the exception of pop-up ads) don’t waste people’s time, except for those people who choose to spend their time brooding over them. ‘-)

@Myk: I do not believe in free everything at the cost of mutilating your blog with ugly third party advertisements.

Well for many blogs: “Besides that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?”

@Myk: I am ready to spend money. Only I´d rather give it directly to Doug instead of going through some shady “click through channels”.

My guess is you are in a drastic minority. If not, it might be worth Doug and other bloggers to develop the infrastructure required to support such an option, but it would have to be an option because certainly more than 90% would not pay. I doubt there are enough people that would make undertaking the development of such infrastructure worthwhile, but I could be wrong and I certainly wouldn’t insert myself to block something that someone else wanted.

@Myk: True, I don´t like the way monetizing strategies have moved to the forefront of blogging. So what, if this is the way this blog will go, fine. It´s just not what I want from blogging and I think I´m entitled to act upon my feelings….I would gladly pay a subscription fee for this blog (unless it´s, like $300 a month). Now, I understand that there will be a legion of people screaming no way because it´s the internet and it´s free.

You are absolutely entitled to act on your feelings, as long as your actions are legal! (for example, firebombing Doug’s house wouldn’t be an appropriate way to act on those feelings, of course. But as someone who likes to study human nature I find your feelings categorical. It seems you’ve developed an attachment to the aspects of something that was in transition and now that’s it has further evolved you don’t like it even though for it to stay the way it started is unrealistic.

History has many examples of the disaffected, and they all become footnotes in history. For example, there are those who hated CDs because they preferred vinyl, but their discontent did not signficantly impede the transition to digitally encoded music. Similary those who hate advertising on blogs will won’t cause blogs to revert back to free; blogging it too much trouble to do well (I know, I tried and I don’t do it well!) that people need an economic incentive to do it well. And given all the other choices a reader has, subscription models don’t work but advertising models do. Even New York Times has moved to advertising; NYT found that attention was far more valuable than protection: http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blog/attentionhasbecomeworthmorethanprotection/ (But you might not want to ‘t follow the link because I have ads on the page.)

Anyway, the bottom line in my argument is that your dislike for ads really only affects you (and those with similar feelings) and it affects you negatively; IOW you are the one who looses from feelings that you choose to have. There’s an old saying “A man got kicked by a jackass. He considered the source and went about his business.” You can get worked up about ads on blogs and cause yourself some heartache, or you can just accept it.

You said “Don’t argue the point” so you probably think I am arguing the point but I’m not. I’m discussing the issue of being upset about something that has evolved and that won’t change back to the old way and how that only really diminishes the quality of life for the person who gets upset. So in sum, if you learn to accept this evolution, you’ll be a happier person.

FWIW.

I definitely empathize with your point of view and appreciate your honesty. When folks like Facebook and YouTube start the monetization process, I start to roll my eyes.

I’m not going to argue that it’s somehow ‘different’ because it’s my blog - I’m just being up front that a) it can generate more money and I could use it! and b) I do think there’s a perception with monetized blogs that they are ’successful’.

One last note: My “Buy Me a Starbucks” button has probably made me about $25 in the last 6 months - so my ‘direct’ money making efforts have been somewhat of a flop.

I hope you stick around - you’ll add a lot to the conversations here!

With Respect,
Doug

And I hope that I didn´t come across as suggesting that Doug should change something for me. He shouldn´t. He should do what he thinks is the right thing for his blog.

And just the same, I should have the right to chose to like it; or not, as is the case here.

Maybe my comments came across as condemning him, personally. Which is not what I was trying to do. True, I don´t like the way monetizing strategies have moved to the forefront of blogging. So what, if this is the way this blog will go, fine. It´s just not what I want from blogging and I think I´m entitled to act upon my feelings.

As for challenging me. Well… let´s see. I think it´s important to know, that I´mk not one of the people that wants stuff for free. I don´t download music, I don´t download movies.

That said. I would gladly pay a subscription fee for this blog (unless it´s, like $300 a month). Now, I understand that there will be a legion of people screaming no way because it´s the internet and it´s free.

Well, yeah. It´s free save for the annoying ads and texlink popups for stuff I didn´t come here for.

Are there ads in the books you read?

I don´t like ads in my TV-Series. That´s why I buy the DVDs. I don´t like to sit through half an hour of commercials before a movie starts, that´s why I buy a DVD.

I do not believe in free everything at the cost of mutilating your blog with ugly third party advertisements.

I am ready to spend money. Only I´d rather give it directly to Doug instead of going through some shady “click through channels”. ]]> http://www.marketingtechblog.com/2007/11/22/ads-on-the-home-page/#comment-67232 Mike Schinkel Sun, 25 Nov 2007 11:50:24 +0000 http://www.douglaskarr.com/2007/11/22/ads-on-the-home-page/#comment-67232 P.S. I always tend to find is a bit sadly humorous when people complain about those things that are given to them for free. FWIW. P.S. I always tend to find is a bit sadly humorous when people complain about those things that are given to them for free. FWIW. ]]>