LAURA CHAMBERS, CEO, MOZILLA CORPORATION As Mark shared in his blog, Mozilla is going to be more active in digital advertising. Our hypothesis is that we n

our expanded focus on online advertising won’t be embraced by everyone in our community

you don’t say

  • rhabarbaOPEnglish
    12•2 months ago

    Creators and journalists need money to survive, and currently, ad-supported viewing is necessary for that to happen.

    The only way out of this is to block advertising. I, personally, think that you should not have a website if you can’t pay for it yourself, but the only acceptable kind of website income is a paywall. If you just have “better advertising”, advertising will never go away. And I hate ads.

    • @d0ntpan1c@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      9•2 months ago

      I, personally, think that you should not have a website if you can’t pay for it yourself

      You might want to consider how expensive web hosting can be, depending on the content and traffic. A belief like that can shut out a huge portion of the world from being able to even bother with a web site. Even a simple blog can get very expensive due to traffic. Maybe not expensive enough for your average 1st world individual… But that still excludes a large portion of the population with internet access.

      • rhabarbaOPEnglish
        -5•2 months ago

        So? Is anyone who can’t afford one legally obliged to have a website?

        • @d0ntpan1c@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          7•2 months ago

          No, but if its prohibitively impossible to do so, people with legitimate good ideas will never be able to do anything about it. Barriers to entry only serve the wealthy.

    • Dark ArcEnglish
      3•2 months ago

      Consider this: every website where you block ads is now inaccessible to you. How did that belief work out?

      • richmondezEnglish
        0•2 months ago

        And if everyone blocked ads and couldn’t see sites that insisted on advertising, how would that work out for the websites?

        • Dark ArcEnglish
          1•2 months ago

          Totally fine. That website does not at all benefit from your presence if you’re not paying them in any way (unless it’s a social media website).

          • richmondezEnglish
            1•2 months ago

            Why have content on the web at all if it can’t be viewed by anyone? Even if generated with an intention to generate profit, there is no opportunity to do so if no one is looking at it.

            • Dark ArcEnglish
              1•2 months ago

              Plenty of sites operate on advertising or paywall based methods or additional services beyond what they publicly offer.

              The web is a lot of things not just free “journalism” and personal blogs.

              This argument that all websites should just be free content that the author not only takes the time to write but actively loses money to host is just not realistic.