Apple’s iOS 9 ad blocking threatens Google’s lifeblood

“For iOS 9 Apple introduced a couple of new technologies related to its Safari web browser. The first is the ability of developers to write extensions for Safari that would be approved by Apple and distributed through the App Store,” Mark Hibben writes for Seeking Alpha. “The second is the ability to write a content blocking extension for Safari.”

An article in AppleInsider pointed out that web publishers stand to lose over $20 billion in advertising revenue this year, and almost double that in 2016, presumably due to the impact of iOS 9,” Hibben writes. “Marco Arment posted a blog piece predicting the demise of the web advertising business model: ‘Web publishers had things pretty nice for a while. Those days are over. It won’t be easy for many to move on, and not everyone will make it.'”

“The use of ad blockers will only accelerate a process that is already underway in Internet content delivery. This is a shift away from advertising supported content delivery (the general purpose web page, but also advertising supported video and music services), to subscription based content,” Hibben writes. “In the new subscription model, the general purpose web browser will tend to be less preferred as a means of access than custom created apps. Even though content delivery will still be Internet based, the user client will tend to be an app downloaded from an app store. This makes the accessing process more secure for the provider and will tend to reduce fraud and hacking.”

“If Apple’s iOS profitability is any indication, revenue and profits will be quickly drained out of the advertising supported tier of the Internet,” Hibben writes. “In the June quarter, Google made $3.6 billion (20% of total) in revenue from its Network category, which is mostly from partner sites’ display advertising. Losing a significant portion of this revenue could produce something most Google investors don’t anticipate: negative growth.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Somewhere there’s a happy medium in the land of free-to-visit websites, where the ads support the publishers’ operating costs (and even – gasp! – some profit) and actually work for the users (you find a good deal on an SSD drive, for example), yet don’t bombard the user with too many ads, etc. At MacDailyNews, we’re working diligently to get there (more info here) and we thank you for your support!

Hopefully, Apple’s tools can assist users in getting better experiences without harming their favorite sites and there is never anything even remotely close to the backlash a Jeffries analyst described in June “where certain sites are ‘not optimized for use with Safari.'”

(MacDailyNews is a independent website. We’re not owned by a large corporation. Without our advertisers, we wouldn’t be here. Even the act of allowing an ad to load – whitelisting – helps MacDailyNews continue to operate. As always, thank you so much for visiting and for your support! We really appreciate it!)

SEE ALSO:
Apple News is fast, responsive, enjoyable, and it might become your only news app – July 15, 2015
Apple News shows that Apple wants to bolster and profit from ads, not eliminate them – July 10, 2015
How Apple’s mobile ad-blocker could backfire on the company and iPhone, iPad users – June 12, 2015
Hats off to Web advertising – no, really – July 6, 2015
Apple’s support of mobile ad blocking may upend how the web works – June 12, 2015
iOS 9 lets app developers make ad blockers for Safari – June 10, 2015

39 Comments

    1. Do not use profanity against Google. Why are you so angry with them? Is it because they are successful and you are jealous. Google is the best web in the world. They are awesome, generous, and also very kind. DO NOT wish death for them ok.

  1. Many of us do not object to ads, we actually get value from them by learning about products and services. What we object to is the business model of Google and others who spy on our every move to profile us and then sell our personal information to advertisers (and others?) for $Hundreds per year.

    Why not let us volunteer information about ourselves and our interests so that we can SELECT for ourselves what ads or ad groups we want to see?

    1. I don’t have a problem with ads. I have a problem with the type of ads so often displayed on websites. If a site promised the following, I might consider unblocking them:

      — No intrusive ads. That means no ads that move, no ads that play sound, no ads that play video. Just sit there motionless like the rest of the website and let me read it I want to.
      — No ads for transparently obvious scams. That means no “mom discovers amazing trick”, no teeth-whitening bullsh*t, no ads promising prizes.

      And that applies to ads delivered through third-parties. I don’t want to hear “We can’t control what our ad provider sends us!”

      You do that for me, I’ll consider whitelisting your site.

      ——RM

      1. I had recently white-listed MDN after reading their reasoning behind it. But after trying it for a couple weeks I couldn’t take it any more. It was the boobs; seriously, there were bazooms all over the place. I’m no spring chicken, but I ain’t dead yet, or gay. And when I see hot chicks, I have to fight to keep from clicking. Sorry MDN, but I just had to bail. Forgive me for my weakness.

    1. I have to agree with this. I started reading this article on my iPad mini 1st generation (it’s currently restarting) and I’m finishing it on my Mac. I guess that no one ever bothered at MDN to test their website on *ALL* supported iOS devices, including the iPad mini 1st generation. When read from Flipboard, it’s absolutely horrible. An entire page can easily take 30 seconds to load and put in place (on a company’s LAN, not a shitty phone line). When I initially tried to type my comment on my iPad mini, it was unbearable. I would tap the text field, the keyboard would appear and then would disappear! Over and over and over, for over 10 minutes!

      I like MDN but, seriously, it’s the worst website I’ve been visiting so far, as far as ads and design are concerned.

  2. The worst thing about internet ads are that some of them them are resource hungry and burden the battery, and the hardware. Seriously, why should I upgrade my hardware and shorten my battery life so you can throw content my way that I did not invite or want?

  3. I don’t mind ads — I used to work in the ad business — but I DO mind the tracking by Google and others. If I search for a mattress one day, my web browsing for the next three weeks will be dominated by mattress ads.

    I understand this is now the Standard Operating Procedure for websites, but I find it intrusive and a little creepy.

    1. That’s always been a head-scratcher for me why it hasn’t long been offered. The most Apple centric website has the least Apple like behavior when it comes to Ads.

      I am more likely to pay an annual (not automatically recurring) fee for ad-free content than I am to whitelist on an ad blocker. I try to surf MDN without an ad blocker as much as I can stand it, but especially when on mobile devices the page load performance just sucks, so block I do, sadly. Also agree with LordRobin above about most of the obtrusiveness of ads that is also a sore spot.

      MDN…can you please address the repeated question of why you haven’t made available the option to purchase an ad-free experience? I truly want to support you, but you don’t always make it easy to do so. There’s no seamlessness here.

Add Your Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.