BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

Inside Forbes: More Numbers On Our Ad Blocking Plan -- and What's Coming Next

This article is more than 8 years old.

I should have known it was coming, especially in a newsroom full of quick-witted journalists. "So, about AdGate..." That's how a staffer began her question during a recent meeting of digital editors. It was a pointed reference to the outcry over an initiative we began in mid-December asking Forbes.com visitors who use ad blockers to turn them off. If they did, they’d get a new an ad-light experience for 30 days. If they didn’t, they’d be denied access to our content. Ad-blocking fans quickly took to Twitter to denounce us. There was discomfort internally, too. The inquiring FORBES editor wanted to understand the initiative's impact on contributors, who are part of our audience-based incentive plan. Her concern: If too many ad-blocking users bolted rather than disable the software, the one-two punch of fewer readers and less sharing across the Web could negatively affect a writer's income.

Since starting the experiment with 50% of our ad-blocking visitors, we've worked to be as transparent as possible -- with our readers, the media and publishing colleagues who have sought our counsel as they, too, tackle the dramatic rise in ad blocking. My first post explaining our thinking is here. Then came a second -- on the reactions and our early learnings. This post provides additional data and outlines what we're doing now.

First, some numbers and a chart:

— Since Dec 17, 4 million desktop visitors, or 42.3% of those asked, have either disabled their blockers or whitelisted Forbes.com , gaining access to content and the ad-light experience. That means no Welcome ad, no video ads inserted between paragraphs and no interstitial ads between posts.

— With those blockers disabled, we delivered 63 million ad impressions that would have otherwise not been seen. The revenue generated by those ads is not immaterial, and would be a welcome addition to any editorial budget.

-- In January, visitors who turned off blockers spent an average 149 seconds per session consuming written content. That compares with 117 seconds for visitors placed in a control group with their blockers still active and 92 seconds for non ad blocking readers. Average page views were 2.7 for visitors who turned blockers off, 2.2 for the control group and 1.9 for non blocker visitors. Bottom line: the time spent, engagement and demographics of those who turned off ad blockers make for a valuable audience for both journalists and marketers.

— Overall site traffic remains strong, too. It fact, we hit a record 76 million unique visitors in January, as measured by Google Analytics. That was up from 64 million in December, when the experiment was in effect for two weeks.

Now take a look at the chart below. It begins to address some internal concerns. Content consumption on Forbes.com in January varied little when looking across subject categories. In other words, visitors who never used ad blockers, those in a control group allowed access with blockers, and visitors who turned blockers off pretty much visited subject channels in the same proportions. Since technology savvy visitors are more likely to download ad blocking software, the thinking was they'd be less willing to disable it and our technology writers would lose readers. In fact, our technology channel's share of the overall traffic  (in red) was similar across the three groups. And those who turned off their blockers to read technology-related posts spent an average 123 seconds on the content vs. 69 seconds for visitors who never used blocking software.

Our gaming writers were particularly worried because their followers were early adopters of ad blockers. We don't have all the data to completely calm their fears, but page views and time spent were on average higher for visitors who turned off their blockers than those in the control group with blockers still enabled. The technology and gaming usage numbers are powerful metrics for both contributors and marketers as the industry looks to align itself with engaging content (see my post on The Rise of the Super Journalist).

Now, here are some adjustments we implemented today:

-- A/B testing of different messages aimed at ad blocking visitors, with a link to instructions on how to disable ad blocker software or white list Forbes.com.

-- Videos at the top of posts will no longer auto play.

-- Visitors who turn an ad blocker off and then back on (or whitelist Forbes.com and then reverse that action) will be able to access only one page on a subsequent visit before we close the off-on side door.

Our ad blocking initiative will soon go beyond the number of ads on a screen. Privacy, security and bandwidth are also reasons consumers download ad blocking software. So-called “Original Sin” (offering up digital content for free) led to the banner ad. Ad tech enabled the targeting and retargeting of consumers with marketing messages on the Web. Rich media produced slower-loading ads that tapped consumer data plans. Not surprisingly, ad blockers found a few hundred million customers around the world. Understanding this, we plan to step back and audit the file size and load time of ads; the number of cookies, or tracking pixels, dropped on screens; the performance and security of ads from computer exchanges; and much, much more. These actions, important for desktop users, will also inform efforts underway to launch our new site for mobile-exclusive users.

The industry is approaching the ad blocking challenge in different ways. Conde Nast's GQ is experimenting with micro payments. Yesterday, Wired said it would offer an ad-free experience for $1 a week. There's no right or wrong way, only experimentation. The goal for us as always is to offer the best consumer experience that works as a business -- and hope a clever staffer comes up with a term for that.

Follow me on TwitterSend me a secure tip