Sven A. Schmidt1d ago
No, we don't. We need to talk about your trackers.
Show threadOlivier Halligon1d ago

@finestructure I share the sentiment, but I'd make the diff between "ad blocker" and "tracker blocker" though.

i.e. in practice I could be understanding of "either subscribe to support us or browse for free but with ads, bc _we can't work for free_".

But I would never tolerate "either subscribe or _enable cookies to allow us to track you_".

They can still serve you (non personalized) ads to get revenue for their work without needing to track you for it

Show threadSven A. Schmidt1d ago
@aligatr I run a website that has no tracking, still serves ads, and isn’t affected by ad blockers. The onus isn’t on me to deal with the distinction 🤷‍♂️
Show threadSven A. Schmidt1d ago

@aligatr I didn’t mean this to sound contentious. I get your point and I think it’s important to support sites!

The thing is that these banners are always about the tracking cookies.

Show threadWorkshopshed
@finestructure @aligatr the challenge is for the advertisers to understand their return on investment. But if they think about sales £ vs spend £ rather than views and clicks they wouldn't need all these trackers?
Jun 20 at 12:30pmWeb
Show threadMark Koek8h ago
@Workshopshed @finestructure @aligatr they didn’t have that with newspaper ads either - you can know the amount of viewers but not who they are and what they do
Show threadWorkshopshed7h ago
@mkoek @finestructure @aligatr I think the approach with newspapers was to periodically survey the readership