Fool Me Once. Naw, not again

Forbes Message after you hit continue but your adblocker is still on

Dear Forbes, we are not giving you another chance, we unblocked you (or actually paused Adblock) previously and the results were disastrous. You will not fool us into a second chance. “Lengthen Your Healthspan” and improve your site by not promising things like “ad-light” experiences. That is not L.E.A.N or a D.E.A.L.

You sound like a diet commercial, and turning it off, when it is the only way we can actually concentrate on what you are supposed to be selling: CONTENT, instead of featuring 20+ pieces of advertising that are in no way contextually, semantically, or even remotely tangential to what I’m looking to read.

You do realize there are better sources for an article on the same subject, that you are in a competitive market place, but feel you need to not only rely upon, but pander to your advertisers, who are of the lowest possible quality for what should be thought of (in journalistic terms) as a luxury line: appealing to the 1% which founded you.

Did I miss a memo, did you suddenly decide that your brand didn’t matter, or that online using best practices etc… or that the reader of your website, magazine, brand were cretins that literally weren’t able (because of Ad blindness) to distinguish between spam links that are literally there for no other reason than to catch someone in a moment of weakness

Curiosity Got The Better of Us

So maybe we lied a bit in that introduction, but wondering if there was a reform we clicked and here is what we saw, and you are likely to see. Buyer, Beware!

Ad-light seems to include no less than 24 ads. TWENTY-FOUR. Which as you might well be aware impacts load time, creates ad blindness by cluttering up the visual real estate and only serve as a trap to any unsavvy user. Do you really consider 24 ads, links, words or pictures that aren’t about your content are a good way to woo a person intent on not seeing them. That is light to you? Wonder what the full calorie experience is like. Being on a desktop/laptop the two dozen loaded quickly, on a mobile experience you’re clearly aware that would grind even the fastest phone to a halt.

So you really need to rethink this messaging, then take those quotes and AT LEAST try to not making them look like they fell on the page, and rethink this approach. Those ads were revolting, and distracting, while slightly a step up from our previous experience, it is like deciding which is worse getting gum on your shoe or dog sh*t honestly.

So please, you are a magazine for the 1%, you occasionally post an article (about once a month) by a writer that has something interesting to say, in this case unblocking you was not worth it, which may be in part to the above messaging. This is just a friendly reminder, but to others who want to pop-up and approach marketing from an interruptive approach they need to think very hard about how many times your user is disturbed and the benefits of that. Usually it diminishes the return, but again you do what you think is best.

Getting us to subscribe, either with dollars or our inbox, is not an easy feat. Whoever sold you on this, let’s try to shame them into viewing our content sold you clunker of an idea. If you focus-group tested this, and saw real people react with horror & anger, you’d realize this is not the way to go. This won’t boost your ad revenue, but diminish it further as the next time your link crosses these eyes we will most definitely not click on it.

So marketers stop doing this, don’t tell others to do this, and most of all this is not what lead generation, subscription appeals, or any other productive activity looks like. This is insulting and condescending and you are better than that, and if you are not, then may you go out of business.