Shortly after WWDC 2015 and the introduction of content blocker extensions for Safari, Dean Murphy put them to the test—using iMore as the example.
After turning off all 3rd party scripts, the homepage took 2 seconds to load, down from 11 seconds. Also, the network activity stopped as soon as the page loaded so it should be less strain on the battery.
I responded to it briefly at the time, and said we were aware of the problems and working on them. That response piece ended up being used as a further example by Nick Heer, and the whole situation has now been summed up by John Gruber on Daring Fireball:
I love iMore. I think they're the best staff covering Apple today, and their content is great. But count me in with Nick Heer — their website is shit-ass. Rene Ritchie's response acknowledges the problem, but a web page like that — Rene's 537-word all-text response — should not weigh 14 MB.
It's not just the download size, long initial page load time, and the ads that cover valuable screen real estate as fixed elements. The fact that these JavaScript trackers hit the network for a full-minute after the page has completed loaded is downright criminal.
Dean's right, Nick's right, and John's right. Of course they are. As I said in the original response, I know that, you know that, and everyone working at iMore and our parent network, Mobile Nations, knows that. Ads in and of themselves aren't bad, and can indeed provide a service where everyone wins, which is why so many sites and so many mediums employ them. But many of the ads—and the services that deliver them—suck. We all know that.
Saying "bad ads suck; you hate them and so do we," is a ten-word answer, though. It's easy. What's hard are the next ten words, and the ten words after that—how are we going to fix it?.
Page load
First, the content size issue. 14MB is infuriating. My guess is that he was getting a video ad on the page that's no longer being served. We've been testing internally and getting consistently under 4MB for that page, which is still hefty.
A large part of that is ads, certainly, but even "plain text" articles have a font, as well as Retina graphics for at least one very large photo and a lot of thumbnails.
We—and by "we" I mean the Mobile Nations design and tech teams—have done a lot to streamline the site templates over the last few months. We rolled out new review templates, new article templates, and just last week, a new home page template. All are considerably lighter and faster than anything we've ever had before. And it's something we're continuing to work on and make even better.
The same applies to the ads. Currently, ads pay the bills at iMore and Mobile Nations. That hasn't always been the case. Back in the heyday of TreoCentral and CrackBerry, accessory and app sales provided significant revenue. So much so that, for a while, we had zero ads.
Now that app stores are built into the operating systems, phone cases are available at every mall kiosk, and Amazon.com sells gear at steep discounts, that revenue has largely gone away.
So, ads...
iMore just passed the 10 million unique readers milestone. Mobile Nations just had its best month ever, and passed 37.4 million unique readers. We're incredibly grateful for the support each and every one of you have shown us.
iMore just passed the 10 million unique readers milestone.
With that growth, however, comes bills to match. Mobile Nations is still an independent company, with no media conglomerate or VC funding behind us, and we still have to pay our dozens of writers, videographers, developers, designers, and support staff, and all of our expenses.
While we sell premium ads directly to advertisers, that only fills a small subset of the required "inventory" to support the network. Some 85% of ads we served last month were "programmatic"—provided by ad exchanges like Google Adx and Appnexus. Those exchanges are pretty much black boxes. We get a tag, we insert it, and ads appear.
The black box
Each ad gets its own iframe, so load is asynchronous and, if one fails, it doesn't kill the entire site. Unfortunately, that also means each one fires its own trackers, even if those trackers are identical across ads. It's terribly inefficient.
We've tried to find or figure out a way to streamline them, but haven't been able to. They're built into the foundations of all the major networks, ad and social, ostensibly to provide more "relevant" content.
When we do get good ads, as soon as they finish their allotted impressions, they go away, and the ad spot gets back-filled with "remnants" which get progressively worse and worse the more we refresh the site.
Yes, we're well aware of how insane that sounds.
We also have no ability to screen ad exchange ads ahead of time; we get what they give us. We can and have set policies, for example, to disallow autoplay video or audio ads. But we get them anyway, even from Google. Whether advertisers make mistakes or try to sneak around the restrictions and don't get caught, we can't tell. It happens, though, all the time.
When bad ads appear, we report them and ask that they be disabled. Since different people in different geographies see different ads, it can be a challenge to identify them, and it can take a while to get them pulled. It's a horrible process for everyone involved.
It's so bad, our tech team has been exploring their own "bad ads" extension that would identify any resource-heavy ads that violate our policies, and provide us with better information so the ad network can more easily find and kill them. And yes, we're well aware of how insane that sounds.
Going mobile
Just as desktop ads pay far less than old-fashioned print ads, mobile ads pay far less than desktop. Because phone displays are smaller than desktop, ads are also far harder to ignore. They're not off to the side or a small strip on a big screen. They're in our faces and in our way.
As more and more people move to mobile, revenue goes down, and the typical response is to amp up the ads in an attempt to mitigate the loss. That, of course, just makes them even more annoying.
Ad networks have not responded well to any of this. Hell, they still haven't fully responded to Retina and HiDPI displays, and those came out in 2011.
Maybe content blockers in Safari will help.
You'd think the ad industry would be at the forefront of user experience, and that making gorgeous, high performance, highly engaging ads would boost conversion and ultimately income for everyone. Unfortunately, it seems like whatever math they're running shows bad ads perform well enough that making great ads isn't worth the extra effort.
Mobile Nations, big as we are, are nowhere nearly big enough to force the ad exchanges to fix the bad programmatic ads, let alone influence them towards making better ones. Likewise, many advertisers simply don't want to expend the resources needed to make great ads and maintain relationships with multiple publications, so they're content to let the exchanges handle everything. That further limits our options.
Maybe content blockers in Safari will help. Maybe they'll affect ad exchanges enough that they're forced to provide better, flatter experiences. Maybe they'll encourage advertisers to consider more creative work. (We held similar hopes for Safari Reader and similar services.) Likely it'll get worse before it gets better.
Either way, even though it's an industry-wide problem, ultimately it's our site and our network, and responsibility for improving the experience falls entirely on us.
Going native
To try and provide a better experience for our most frequent readers, we've invested several years and a non-insigificant amount of money making a native iPhone app for iMore.
It's not only free, but we've deliberately kept it ad-free. We've also recently made it universal for the iPad as well. I sincerely don't know how long we'll be able to maintain it, but for now and the foreseeable future, it's there for anyone and everyone who wants it.
Ad alternatives
Subscriptions and memberships haven't historically worked for sites our size. Most people simply don't see the value in paying for content. We're all too used to getting everything "for free".
That leaves fully disclosed "native ads" (not the duplicitous kind, but the equivalent of a TV ad or podcast sponsor read—the kind Ben Thompson has expounded on in the past), and sponsored content.
The latter, if done carefully and smartly, can lead to a true win-win-win for the advertiser, the publisher, and most importantly, the readers.
In recent years, Mobile Nations has run several extremely successful sponsored campaigns. Talk Mobile 2013, made possible with the support of BlackBerry, allowed us to produce 50 videos and articles, and kick off a conversation around privacy, security, social responsibility, and other topics important to our community. Moreover, it helped us significantly improve the level and scale of our content creation.
Windows Central Hidden Gems, sponsored for the third time now by Microsoft, has helped us shine a spotlight on great apps that weren't getting the attention they deserved, and bring together our community for some early summer fun. It also let us further improve our content and the system that manages it.
Never mind as a content creator, as a reader, this is the type of stuff I want to see more of. Making it work not only at scale, but at sufficient revenue levels, and consistently over time, however, is still an ongoing challenge.
The future
One of the great things about Mobile Nations is that everyone here is a tech enthusiast and content creator. Our CEO ran VisorCentral and TreoCentral, and still writes code for us almost every day (his latest project is our brand new notification/follow system). Our President ran Treonauts. Our Chief Media Officer ran CrackBerry and, despite his insane schedule, is starting up a new review series because creating content is something he loves to do.
While they have the responsibility of making sure Mobile Nations continues to remain financially viable and, hopefully, grows and thrives, they also care desperately about the reader experience. And they're incredibly frustrated by all of this as well.
That's why we make sure everyone on the iMore and Mobile Nations team read every tweet, every comment, and every email complaint we get—so we never, not for a minute, forget we have to make this better.
We appreciate everyone's feedback. Please keep it coming!
Kevin Michaluk and Marcus Adolfsson contributed to this article.
Reader comments
Content blockers, bad ads, and what we're doing about it
i've been using an ad blocker for so long that i forgot webpages have advertisements on them.
How about a negligible subscription model like Whatsapp use. e.g. $1/£1 for a year? Would that not bring in a large enough revenue to remove a lot, if not all the adverts?
Sent from the iMore App
Nope, lol.
With 10 millions unique reader, that 10 millions dollars, my guess, it is more that enough to remove all of them
You lost me at 'Google.' The Mountain View Ad Agency is why I have ad blockers installed and Flash uninstalled. I know you have to make money, but inserting some code and blindly letting ad spammers do as they please is abuse to your readers.
It's like you didn't read the article.
I am personally ok, yes i look at something at amazon and then it will hunt me down in many websites, but i respect is the trade-off for free content, and quality content.
We're all frustrated by these obnoxious and intrusive ads but your comment doesn't provide any suggestions for replacing the revenue they provide. If most of your revenue comes from black box ad networks like Google, and more transparent and less intrusive ads don't come close to paying the bills, what are you supposed to do?
Imagine if you had a good paying job at a company you hated but were unable to find any alternative employment for anywhere near the same salary.
Your anger and frustration should be directed solely at Google and the other ad networks, not at quality websites that are reluctantly dependent on them for revenue.
If this is really a problem then you, as the one serving the problem, find an answer. It is not our job to find an answer. We aren't the ones trying to make a living from obnoxious ads.
And just like if I had a job I hated but were unable to find any alternative employment, I weigh what is most important to me. If having a job I like is important, then I have to change my lifestyle to match my income, that is what I do. You do realize people actually make this decision everyday. It's a tough decision. But there are choices that can be made. You don't _have_ to hate your job. You just have to figure out what is more important in your life.
My anger is just as rightly directed to the ones who enable Google and the other ad networks. They wouldn't be able to do this except that people let them. Those people have decided Google's and other ad networks' income is more important than annoying their readers.If they really wanted another solution they should be the entrepreneurs they are and make one. No one is putting a gun to their heads and saying "Serve Google or die". They just opted for the solution with the least friction for ad revenue.
This is a capitalist free market, not totalitarianism. As long as people are willing to submit to Google and the ad networks, they will continue to serve obnoxious ads. Someone has to figure out who is the real customer for the ad networks.
People _say_ they need the ads. I have yet to find anyone who says this and tried otherwise. It seems to be the default position. THAT is the problem.
And if they can't get enough people to pay for their content, maybe they need to reconsider their content. People will pay for something they think is worth it.
Joe
I fine that iMore is the first Apple news site I check each morning. I would be willing for sure to pay a small amount for a yearly subscription to the news. I pay for some apps that have a $10/year sub and iMore would be delivering far more value. A few dollars a year would be very valuable.
I'm sure it's possible, but, maybe not feasible, but could you have two tiers. One free that served up ads and one subscription model ad free?
I see at the mobile nations site that there are about 37.5 million readers per month. If you averaged 10 cents / month per reader, that would be a seemingly good cash flow but perhaps still not enough to cover costs.
Thanks for a great Apple news site.
They've apparently done the math and there is seemingly no subscription formula (subscription cost X # of likely subscribers) that can yield anywhere near the same amount of revenue as the black box ad networks. In hindsight, it was probably a mistake to build businesses that relied on these networks. Now they're stuck.
How do you think Google Contributor will affect the mix in the future? It's invite only right now but perhaps with luck they will open it up soon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Contributor
I'd prefer solutions from companies other than those who created the problem in the first place. Additionally, tracking is a less visible but no less important part of the problem. I'd have no interest in paying Google to track what websites I visit and what articles I read. If I wanted that, I'd be using an Android phone and Google Chrome.
"Most people simply don't see the value in paying for content."
Well I do, and do so on two different news sites. Value is exactly what I pay for and I wouldnt have it any other way. Hell, journalist is a hard job and good journalism is precious. But you gotta provide more than just iOS tutorials, Re/code copy-paste and other second/third hand material.
No. Most people don't see the value in paying for THIS content (philosophically, not necessarily this website). People pay for content all the time. The hard part is figuring out how to create something people are willing to pay for. Welcome to real life.
Joe
My visits to all of the Mobile Nations websites have dropped because of the frustration with intrusive ads and other weird formatting decisions over the last six months or so. I imagine most internet users have become adept at ignoring ads, like TV watchers learned long ago. The trend of ever increasing timed pop up and worse ads designed to encourage accidental clicks just sucks.
Well that's what ad blockers are for.
"Subscriptions and memberships haven't historically worked for sites our size. Most people simply don't see the value in paying for content. We're all too used to getting everything "for free"."
I wonder what my clients would think if I put ads on their financial statements, audits, or taxes instead of charging them.
I remember Peter commenting to a critical reader that he can have a big fat refund of free if didn't like the content. That's the problem. Your own writers don't see value in the content either. Or value in that the reader pays by viewing ads and downloading the bloat each and every time he visits iMore.
This isn't a unique problem. Twitter and everyone else is trying to figure out how to best monetize the millions of visitors they get. Newspapers have put up pay walls. And I'm sure their visitors have shrunk as a result.
Still, I can't help feeling that you MUST value your content. No one else will. And you must charge for it if you value it. But like Peter, I get the feeling as long as no one values it, who really cares if it meets any sort of standard? Let's rehash stories that have nothing to do with Apple (see today's frontpage: xbox music, facebook, Amazon echo, logitech branding, etc.). And no value in content just seems to lower the level of discussion in comments. It's all quantity over quality.
We value our content. Many of us make tremendous sacrifices to produce it, well beyond the time and money we're paid for it.
To think otherwise is kind of soul crushing, tbh.
It's also something that goes well beyond iMore, Twitter, or the web. See the recent developer conversations about how they can't afford to make indie apps any more.
If the answers were easy, they'd have been figured out and implemented. I fear it's going to be devastatingly hard. (See also how many Apple sites have shuttered in the last year.)
Sure, have people pay sounds simple enough but you guys have the experience to know whether it would work or not. I'm sure you know better. Back in the treo days, I bought many things from you guys. But no longer because that stuff is everywhere now.
BTW....it's easy to criticize but Gruber didn't really have any answers either. I guarantee he'd have to do the same if he decided to hire a staff and go cover everything apple. The answers seem simpler when it's a one man show or you don't deal at all in ads.
but Gruber does deal in ads. and makes a very great living dealing with them.
Don't let bitter, insensitive, and ill-informed comments like this discourage you. If folks didn't value the content on the site, they wouldn't be here in the first place to comment.
I think sites like BusinessInsider are worthless. Do I spend my time reading them and commenting on their forums? Hell no. That would be a waste of time.
When someone like Gruber cites iMore's Apple coverage as being among the best in the industry, I think you should value his opinion over that of someone like "cardfan".
Umm. Ok then. Lol. I think I advocated they charge for content. I wouldn't say that if I didn't value it. But I hope they do as well. Rene has answered that nicely enough explaining why they haven't went the paid route. Thanks for the comment.
Sent from the iMore App
Rene I still have your black imore tshirt, you gave away on the ipad 2 release on Miami beach! keep up the good work, good people always win at the end!
Really, this is the day to day life in the arts. People create what they love all the time. That doesn't mean other people _have_ to pay for it. Just because you make doesn't automatically justify you making a living from it. You make a living from it because you make something people are willing to pay for it. And just as in the arts, not every great artist actually made money from their work. Van Gogh sold only two paintings in his life, one of those to his brother. He essentially lived off his family. As such he was able to create great art.
Artists (and I consider writing an art) have to make this decision _everyday_. If what they create is not selling then either you figure out how to make what will sell or you make your living off something/someone else. Most non-profit arts organizations have essentially three forms of income—generated (ticket prices, for example), funding (grants, sponsorships, etc), and donations (NPR has all those drives, remember?).
I'm not suggesting you go non-profit (although, why not?), but definitely rethink your business model. Are there other opportunities for revenue worth considering? A ballet company performs Nutcracker each year, not simply because Nutcracker is a great show. But because it helps pay for the rest of the season.
Or just be unapologetic about obnoxious ads and annoying readers.
Just some thoughts,
Joe
Rene, I'm sure you understand why the typical web surfer must have Adblock plus installed with the well known filters. I don't want to be tracked by any company without my consent. I want to read and not be disturbed.
That has nothing to do with being against ads or against you getting paid. Make sponsored posts, stop using any of the ads networks that serve intrusive ads. Make a whole section of the site about advertisements related with Apple and Tech.
iOS 9 will be a blessing for everybody. There was a time when people's favorite thing about TVs were the amazing advertisements. Not, especially the web, it's all about deceiving and lies, steal attention, click-traps, and so on, Fuck that.
It's great that you acknowledge the issue in such an open and forthright way. Indeed I had noticed the increase in ads over the past few months, and a recent redesign had only added to the confusion.
Anyway, I fully support your attempts to make the experience better, hopefully this will happen soon before you lose viewers put off by the ad overdose. Honestly your content is among the best there is in terms of analysis, depth and relevancy, especially at iMore but also across all of Mobile Nations. It is a shame to bury it in intrusive and irrelevant ads! Good luck
Sent from the iMore App
I use an RSS reader (Newsblur) coupled with Ghostery and AdBlock. My news feeds are as clean as a freshly wiped baby butt. LOL
We provide a full RSS feed, which some sites don't do because it also hurts revenue. All of these are hard, hard choices.
Renee, I will pay for your content if you provide a premium subscription. Why not add it as an option? At least it gives the readers a choice...
My biggest gripe isn't the load size of the page, but the ads that pull me back to the top when I've started scrolling
Hi Rene-
Thanks for taking time to write a thoughtful and detailed response. I'm sure trying to find the right balance for serving ads must be extremely frustrating.
What would you think about moving the iMore app to a two-tiered model? Have the free app contain ads (either iAds or another ad network)) and also provide the option to be 'ad-free' for a monthly subscription.
That way you're still providing the app for free, but are also adding the option for people to pay for content without the annoyance of advertising (and Mobile Nations makes $$$).
So few people are willing to pay to remove ads that it makes it unviable as an option. All of us wish it were otherwise.
I'm seeing a time where advertisers will force agencies to change or the advertisers will have little exposer other than their website and places like Amazon and the stores (Apple etc.) that sell their products.
I don't think paying for ad-free content works. I, for one, will not do this no matter what. But white-listing a site with good content and sensible ads is perfectly fine. I don't expect to read valuable information without paying for it. But becoming 'the product' is a non-starter.
BTW, Rene, I know you're aware of the Ars dilemma a while back re ads and how they handled it. Their intransigence and condescending attitude left a bitter taste in my mouth. I blocked them out of principle.
However, I see you're not going down that road and for that I applaud you and your associates. I know a solution is possible even if you 'image' all your ads to make it work.
How about cutting the middle man - the ad networks? Is it utterly impossible to have an ad division and control all presentation and revenue by yourself?
Advertisers find it easier to deal with one or two larger networks than with thousands or millions of individual publishers.
On the topic of your native app, what about an ads/freemium option? You could add a (tasteful) mobile ad at the bottom, then allow us to get rid of it for a subscription of, say, $10 or 20/year. Cancel the sub, ad comes back. Win-win.
I think Macworld and Ars both tried that, and it doesn't seem to have worked at scale? Getting enough people to pay a sustainable price over time is really, really hard.
Can you do into more detail on what a "flatter experience" is for ads?
Like a simple image file instead of a ton of javascript.
Actually, images aren't a bad idea. Done right, they're fairly light and can be placed anywhere, just as long as they don't pop up or force content to bounce around. On an iPhone, space is at such a premium, that anything other than scrolling past it (like it was a post) would be a disaster.
The problem is that "Joe Advertiser" has been persuaded by companies like Google and Facebook that his advertising dollars will yield exponentially higher returns through targeted and tracked ads than through simple, static images.
They may think targeted ads work, but the ads I see don't make sense to me or my wallet. Targeting is something Google has 'sold' to its customers. Kudos to Google. But the advertisers have been duped, largely.
I abhor tracking. Not only that, the fact that I (cookies, etc.) actually help them do this is more than reprehensible. They should store than info on their servers, not on my computer. Yes, VPN is an answer. Clearing your history/cache is another. Let me put it another way, if I went to the mall shopping for shoes and in the fourth shoe store a salesperson was waiting with the prefect pair, I would not buy them nor shop there again.
You and I may agree on this, and targeted advertising may be entirely ineffective on us. But there are millions of gullible people in the world who aren't as discerning. Why do you think spam and sleazy advertising exist?
Wow! I just installed the Adblock Plus add-in for Safari based on the comments above. What a difference it makes!!!
You could keep this app open but have a separate app or an IAP that is ad free. I can't stand ads and would happily pay for a monthly or annual subscription.
Sent from the iMore App
There's a potential solution everyone seems to have forgotten about years ago: micropayments. Given everything that's happened in the meantime, maybe it's time to take another look at it. I for one would be happy to pay a few cents to read an item if I could thereby get rid of the ad clutter and abuse of my bandwidth.
My suggestion would be a per-item charge, but capped at a monthly amount equivalent to a subscription price.
There's stuff like crowdfunding as well. Hasn't been shown to work at scale, sadly.
Yes, but AFAIK it's been years since anybody's even mentioned micropayments. Things change quickly in this business, and yesterday's conventional wisdom might not apply today. Maybe in 2015 there's a critical mass of people who are so sick of the ad glut that they'd be open to trying something else. Pay-Per-View seems to be working OK in the TV realm. I don't subscribe to the New York Times digital edition because the subscription price is too high for what I want. But if I could buy their content in bite-size chunks, I probably would.
"it's been years since anybody's even mentioned micropayments."
Perhaps because they didn't work?
Why do you simply assume that because something didn't work 15 years ago, it couldn't work today? Especially in a realm as dynamic as the Internet, ferheavensake.
There is a reason why everyone forgot about micropayments for news pages: It didn't work. Except for a few idealistic people no one paid. And the infrastructure to get the payment is costly itself and too complicated for many users.
They should just optimize the layout and reduce the number of ads on each page. There are examples of successful news pages with less overhead and better loading times. And don't forget the iPad! It's ironic that iMore is one of the most unstable pages in Safari on the iPad. Crashes all the time.
kudos for being open on this but as gruber stated a reckoning is coming as you guys are gonna have to change wether you want to or not. you have lived too long screwing over your readers
A "reckoning"? Wow. Can't we stay in sequence, please, and get the locusts first?
Nobody is getting "screwed over" here. Whoever thinks anything is truly free, has screwed him/herself quite nicely already.
That reckoning is aimed primarily at Google and Facebook. That's where all the angry anti-advertising articles should be directed.
I also vote for some sort of subscription for an ad-free iMore. iMore's content is well worth it. But, really, your ads really don't bother me much. They can be a bit of a pain when on a mobile device, but the desktop experience on my Mac is just fine.
Second that. It does not have to be either/or, just an option for those who do not want ads, and are honest enough not to deprive you of any revenue by using ad blocking.
The comparison with Macworld and Ars does not really work for me, their subscription process was a pain in the ass (credit cards and everything), and Ars never had an even remotely usable iOS App for anything. I do pay for ad-free AppleInsider and a German Mac-related site; both provide far less content than you do.
Sometimes when I scroll up on the mobile site, instead of the page going up, an ad scrolls up to cover the page. I left iMore for several months because of those ads and only checked back occasionally to see if the site stops doing that. It happens much less often recently for some reason and that's why I'm here.
Subscription would not work because there are so many alternatives. Take my example. The moment I got too annoyed with those scroll up ads I left for months and almost didn't come back. But I kept reading other sites.
Have you considered patreon?
Ad companies are like sleazy telemarketers.
"When bad ads appear, we report them and ask that they be disabled."
And that's why I have been using an ad blocker for years. There is no control over digital ads and what they contain. It is rather common for web sites to be flagged as attack sites by Google due to the ads they serve. There is no quality control. There is no equivalent of Apple's app validation for ads and there needs to be. Ads should be certified safe and efficient by trusted parties or I will continue to block them.
I have been reading iMore for at least 5 years now i used it initially when the iPad was still a rumour as you guys consistently put content that was excellent and you clearly cared the site has changed alot over time and i now completely swear by iMore. I would happily pay 2/3 pounds a month or like 10/20 pounds and with tens of millions of people i can't be alone surely that would get you alot of revenue? #imoreforever but really your mobile site really has become terrible you ads and stories almost alternating in the same column with no distinction just intergrated as one thing and then another banner ad at the bottom of the screen (although) you can close that and if not subs something like patreon or even just giving people a way to donate
Someone in the comments is downvoting everyone who mentions any kind of revenue-making solution. How useful.
I posted in your earlier response article. I'm not a regular reader, but I found the earlier article via Daring Fireball. I peeked back today, out of curiosity, and found this one.
I can't be a regular reader of this website, regardless of how compelling the content might be. I run an ad blocker (I see it as a need to browse the web with an ad blocker) and measured viewing this page alone at >2MB! Needing to download multiple megabytes to view a single webpage is just not practical on a metered non-broadband connection: it's way too expensive, and takes way too long. I completely appreciate why you need ads, but your implementation (and I'm not singling you out, this is true of the "modern web") is fundamentally incompatible with metered non-broadband internet. It may be hard to believe, but I swear, there are many of us out there.
For reference, outside of the luxury of using a coffee shop or airport wifi, most of my browsing is done with Opera Turbo minus images, and with a customized Instapaper->Kindle flow.
Maybe people in my situation are not in your target audience: I can accept that, my feelings aren't hurt. I don't think that is the case however, I am a long time Apple user. Gruber says your site has great content, and I would like to read it on his recommendation.
As an additional point, it seems that the need for small web sites as I am advocating for also helps people viewing the web with assistive technology.
I tried to write this constructively, and I hope it comes across that way. I hope you can do better, and I will check in from time to time.
I think something that would be awesome is if one were to develop an ad blocker plugin that fools the ad server into thinking that it was loaded, but all the data just disappears in to /dev/null
Then if the advertisers figure out how to get around it, the developer hits them with a DMCA circumvention violation!! :D :D :D :D :D :D
I think Safari's Reader mode works like this.
I have been using AdBlock for years; I started reading iMore this spring, when I ordered my Apple Watch. FWIW, I never realized there were ads on iMore until I read this article. Nor have I ever had any trouble with iMore's pages loading slowly.
I've found the content here to be very helpful and thoughtful. I would be willing to pay a modest amount for a membership to support the site. But I would hate to be subjected to ads.
Rene,
Some of the impact is the sheer number of things imore.com loads. 168 image requests on the home page. 99 JS requests. 99!. On the test I ran the page took 2.3 seconds to paint anything and 10x that... 23 seconds... to render. There are calls to third parties all over and there are a ton of different ones. I mean... look: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/150709_H1_10PJ/1/details/. And you're making some basic mistakes - almost 600k of savings just by serving correctly sized images vs resizing in CSS/HTML: https://gtmetrix.com/reports/imore.com/Jw54jp5s. There's more in both reports that suggests you can do some optimization without changing anything externally. But...
I don't know your business but a simple question: do you really need so many third party scripts? Can you not consolidate ads in a couple of networks?
Did you not bother to read the article? Rene explained why there are so many requests.
"Each ad gets its own iframe, so load is asynchronous and, if one fails, it doesn't kill the entire site. Unfortunately, that also means each one fires its own trackers, even if those trackers are identical across ads. It's terribly inefficient.
We've tried to find or figure out a way to streamline them, but haven't been able to. They're built into the foundations of all the major networks, ad and social, ostensibly to provide more "relevant" content."
Yes. My point wasn't to limit the number of ads per ad network but to work with fewer networks period. Go look at the links I gave above - there are a ton of calls to entirely different services. Not all are ads, but many are. Install Ghostery and then come to the home page here. On a 24" screen the listing of different services called by the page barely fits (I'd give you an Imgur link but they're failing right now).
A lot of those trackers are probably associated with the same ad network.
Possible. They're different domains, but it could be the same network. However it's insanely inefficient to have that many trackers. Seriously, go look at the reports I linked. And yeah, they're wasting image bandwidth by resizing things in CSS, etc. It's like they're not even trying, honestly and while I'm sympathetic to the need for revenue multiple megabyte pages need to die
your response fails to address his other points, such as incorrectly resized images -- they load large images then make them appear smaller client-side in html, wasting precious kilobytes...
iMore does or the ad creators do?
Don't care about Ads ... block them anyway!
The main problem is there are too many trackwares around here! Adblock tools not enough .... VPN is the answer....disconnect.me
I think, having read this thread a few times, and after following the Ars ad debate last year, that the ad distributers (Google et al) are sorely out of touch with the average reader, let alone the tech-savvy ones that come to iMore.
Ad companies just want to plaster ads willy-nilly. It's a shotgun approach (regardless what they say about targeting). Worse, their 'content' overwhelms the official content of the site.
The equilibrium readers and site owners are seeking lies between what's happening now and ad-free. The culprit is not the site admins, it's the ad companies. Direct your venom their way.
Sites like iMore deserve to exist, deserve to survive, even thrive. However, sadly, it will take a few more years to sort things out. And sadder, some sites will founder.
Personally, I hope iMore is not one of them. I like reading what they put up for us. And I like that they actually care about what they write about. I also think iMore can take the lead and actually change how ads are presented. Let's support their efforts.
Hi snowflake. You aren't special. Really, your content will be easily reproduced by people that have time and care. Blogging isn't a job. People will do it for free just like they did in 1996.
Actually, blogging is a job. It isn't just some idiot writing stuff, actual research needs to be done first. If you think it's so easy, why don't you do it?
I understand it would be a large and risky undertaking to move the entire website to be subscription-based, and I agree that you would probably not get enough subscribers to continue. However, it is very easy to detect when a user is using an ad blocker. How about putting up an un-obtrusive banner at the top (similar to Wikipedia's annual fund raising) for those people? Something like "We notice you are using an ad blocker. Perhaps you do not realize that this website is entirely supported by ad revenue. Since you would prefer not to view ads, would you consider making a $10 donation to help support this website?"
Sure, it won't get everyone to donate. But you might be surprised how many people will donate. And that would all be extra money you are not getting now.
"We notice you are using an ad blocker...."
As if the viewer doesn't know an adblocker is in use. Come on. The reason they're using one is the core of this whole discussion. A friendly reminder assumes the reader will just roll over and say "Okay, blast me with ads, overwhelm the content." That's not going to happen.
The message is "I see our ads are upsetting you, let me go back to (Google etc.) and see if I can change things to help. If that's not about the happen, the whole business model needs a makeover. That's where we are now.
I just hope iMore can survive it.
"As if the viewer doesn't know an adblocker is in use." Actually, I never think about it. I installed my adblocker a long time ago, and it's easy to forget that some web sites have ads that I'm not seeing.
If Mobile Nations believe they have quality content, I believe people will pay. With membership, you also get quality audience.
Pando creates quality content, which is why they believe they can pull it off. I'm happy to support them in that endeavor.
I do enjoy some content on iMore (mostly Peter Cohen), but if you want me to pay, you gotta get rid of the click bait and fluff enjoyed by some of your writers.
How do other major websites manage to not have this problem with ads? This really started when Mobile Nation websites went through the huge redesign. No doubt the new sites are nice eye candy but not sure it's worth it if this problem is built in. I.E. A feature
I do wonder how Mobile Nations considers the News app and the iAd system, whether it is a good experience for readers (a solid bet based on Apple's track record) and sustainable revenue for the content provider.
When not using the iMore app I typically find what I want to read and save it to Pocket, and usually no ads are in the way and doesn't take too long to load, but how do websites obtain revenue if people are doing that?
Sent from the iMore App
A big thanks to Rene for helping us all understand.
Next up: Howzabout the response from Google & the other ad nets you use, to your — and our — concerns? Seems like they have the opportunity to provide a relevant technical fix. In fact, once iOS9 and El Capitan hit the webs, they'll be looking at a massive implosion of their attractiveness/net payments if they don't. Must be something brewing in Mountain View.
a symptom of your problem -- your Talk Mobile image is a large "hero" shot, but incorrectly resized in HTML to occupy a small thumbnail worth of content space. thus all the kbs go wasted. instead, a smaller image sized at the dimensions it's going to be used at would make more sense.
http://www.imore.com/sites/imore.com/files/styles/larger/public/field/im...
Rene,
How about a pledge drive? Works for NPR...:
Sent from the iMore App
Nice write up. I never knew how any of this worked. I learned something new today... Can i go home now?
I just want to know who are the people who actually pay attention or click on advertisements loaded by websites. I have never interacted with an ad with the exception of clicking away a pop up ad. I'm still unclear how these companies that advertise on sites like this feel as if this will provide revenue for them. I know the websites need these ads to monetize but I honestly want to know who the people are that clicking on these ads so that this continues to be a viable revenue source.
Users are the ones who can make this change happen by ignoring the ads or not visiting sites that load crappy and destructive web viewing adverts. It will force the entire industry to find a new model for earning revenue. I know the hard part is finding what that new model will be.
Fantastic article - Kudo's Renee for the open response! For years I've used ad blockers like Ghostery in order to get a usable experience on sites and I've come to depend on those add-on's as much as I depend on the sites themselves. That said, I've also always felt very bad about using those blockers as I know how much the sites rely on ads to provide great content. It's a two-edged sword.
Even though for the past several years I've donated a significant portion of my time to moderating for Mobile Nations, I still feel bad about blocking a revenue stream they sadly need to pay their bills. So, if MN ever offered a yearly subscription based deal, I'd gladly pay to: A) help solve the problem, and B) stick it to the black box ad companies like Google. Even if they offered a multi-year subscription for more money, I'd be in.
My bone to pick is always grammar. Though excellent points are made in the piece, grammar errors stop me dead in my tracks.
"Mediums", really? Or "everyone read". They're just plain wrong. I forgot the third one.
At least you're apologetic about it. My standard policy is black list any web-site that generates an auto launch of the app store on devices. Windowscentral started doing that on my iPhone. I complained to Rubino about it. He wasn't just unapologetic, he was an asshole.
So windowscentral is black listed on our networks. Sorry, an web-site that causes OS level application launches I consider to be a security threat.
Haven't heard any grief from users about it. Although, I'm still dealing with fallout from blocking Drudgereport for the same thing. Tough. The resistance has to start somewhere.
I agree, "We have an app, here you go" sites should be banned. It's rude at best, destructive at worst, and downright ignorant all the time.
To be honest, I've removed iMore from my favorites on all my iDevices because of the clutter and confusion they've coded in. It's OS X only. Don't get me wrong, I value their content, just not their delivery methods.
However, now that they've seen how we feel, maybe some attention will be given to page design. If they don't, then we'll know how they feel about us, the reader.
(disclaimer - I'm a co-founder with a company that offers an adblock fair alternative).
It seems that the underlying problem is the arms race between advertisements tools - that are looking for more data and more opportunities to show ads, and the users which their web experience is being compromised.
The saying "if it's free, you are the product", to my mind, points to the core of the issue - users are eyeballs and are not part of the ad transaction.
standsapp.org is a new browser app that act to improve the web experience and privacy by prioritizing content over ads and blocking all 3rd party advertising, however, it does allow some ads to go through control environment. The ad revenue for these ads that the user did agree to see are split between the publisher and a cause that the user choose.
This solution allows publishers to get the same ad revenue that allows them to operate, without compromising the user experience, while providing people with a perfect motivation to agree to see some ads - doing good.
We would much appreciate any feedback
I wish I could post a screenshot. At least 80% of the screen on my iPhone 6 is filled with ads. I can't see a single piece of content as a large ad overlays the content. I get the need for advertising but if I am literally unable to read (or load) the site then I can't give you eyeballs to sell. iMore isn't unique and I don't mean to single you out. I'm looking at you, The Verge. iMore unfortunately got caught up in the middle of a bigger debate. The web for me for reading content is almost dead due to the tremendous amount of advertising and the impact of page load time, UX, and performance.
Turned off javascript and most crap disappeared! Im okay with ads as long as I can ignore them but they are now floating around everywhere, sucking network and cpu/gpu resources. Made my iPad lag and usually takes a minute before the page crashes and Safari reloads it. This happens maybe every fifth visit on imore.
I guess googles ads are the only ones generating revenue since they are EVERYWHERE today. No matter what page I go to, it's bogged down with ads from google. This I hate and also when videos shows ads and then say I can't view the video because of geo-location restrictions. If I'm not permitted to see the video, don't show me the ad either! This isnt a problem for this site, just generally on regular news sites.