Whitelist this, pal

Everybody in online media, I suspect, really wants a paywall, but most know how well that’s going to go over, so instead we get incidents like this:

The page I landed on immediately threw up a screen-covering box demanding I either put them on my ad-blockers whitelist immediately OR pay them some stupid amount of money to “subscribe.”

They try to soften the fuckery by saying ad-blocking is just not cool, and throw a little “thank you” in there, but it’s about as sincere as the IRS saying “sorry for the theft.”

Ad blocking really isn’t all that cool. It’s positively glacial, though, next to the standard practice of allowing indiscriminately all manner of streams, especially the ones who (1) contain autostart video and/or (2) try their damnedest to crash your browser. Running a skeleton crew, as most such sites do for financial reasons, makes it essentially impossible for someone to check all this incoming third-party crap and block the worst of it.

Okay, there are very few things in the world that will get me to add some random website to my whitelist, and demanding I do this is absolutely not one of them. In fact, demanding anything is a pretty quick way for me to tell you to go shove a rabid honey badger up your ass. I respond pretty well to “please” and “if you don’t mind.” Otherwise, it’s honey badger time.

One Mellivora capensis to go, please:

Fine. I’ve seen this shit before, I’ll just click back to the original place and continue on with my browsing, no doubt my life will remain full and fine without reading whatever nonsense I’d been shuttled to.

Except, unlike usual when I can hit the little left-facing arrow at the top of the browser to go back, [they] had decided to make that unavailable.

This is not passive acceptance for the sake of saving money; this is active malfeasance.

Do they sell honey badgers in lots of twelve?


  1. fillyjonk »

    12 November 2017 · 12:29 pm

    A few sites I’ve seen offer the option of giving ’em your e-mail address, I presume for spamming (or perhaps sale-to-spammers) purposes.

    Turns out I have an expired e-mail address (my late lamented .netcommander.com address), which fools them for now, and I admit I chuckle at the thought of a pile of spam getting a 404.

    And yeah, a pox on the sites that won’t let you go back from whence you came. Too many places do that now.

  2. CGHill »

    13 November 2017 · 8:42 am

    There are people who keep a stash of email addresses for just such an occasion. I an distrustful of such schemes.

  3. Holly Hunter »

    13 November 2017 · 9:32 am

    It should be illegal for any site to deny you the right to gracefully back out. Why is this tolerated?

  4. CGHill »

    13 November 2017 · 9:56 am

    You won’t find me tolerating it.

  5. nightfly »

    14 November 2017 · 11:10 am

    That kind of intrusiveness is the whole purpose of ad blockers, so it’s not surprising that the pushy sorts didn’t get the hint. Fine. Welcome to bankruptcy.

RSS feed for comments on this post