One-third (33%) of U.S. consumers said they are very or somewhat likely to try using ad-blocking software in the next three months, according to a new survey by Digital Content Next, previously known as the Online Publishers Association.
Even allowing a substantial discount on these figures, DCN still estimates that around one in ten Americans (9%) will actually end up using ad-blocking software in the next three months. Given the limited time frame and growing public awareness of ad-blocking software as an option, it’s plausible to imagine that proportion increasing rapidly over the next year or so.
On that note, the DCN also pointed to new threats that could accelerate adoption of ad-blocking software, including enterprise-level installation of ad blockers (for example to improve network speeds or security), or carriers that offer ad blocking as a competitive feature to woo consumers.
Addressing consumer attitudes toward advertising, the DCN study also found that 70% of respondents said they dislike ads that expand over content or automatically begin playing with sound. Separately, 68% said they were concerned about ads tracking their online behavior, and 57% said that ads were causing their Web pages to load too slowly.
DCN CEO Jason Kint stated: “On a scale of one to 10, my concern is at a level eight or nine -- our industry has ignored consumer concerns and now these same consumers are speaking up by installing ad-blocking software. We need leaders across the industry to focus on providing better experiences, transparency and controls that will solve this issue.”
In a separate report released earlier this year, PageFair predicted that ad blockers could cost publishers around $22 billion in lost advertising revenues globally this year, adding that the figure is set to go up as adoption of ad blockers becomes more widespread.
One out of Three is too kind. Its Bigger than that.
ONLY one out of three? Probalby only because not enough Americans know about them yet.
And look at the "solution" that is proposed--- "We need leaders across the country to focus on providing better experiences, transparency and controls that will solve this issue". That really nails it---right?
The only way to resolve this issue is for digital ad sellers to organize the ways ads are positionned so as not to be so disruptive of the users' access to editorial content. And, secondly, they must limit the amount of ad clutter to manageable levels.
How can this be done. In my view the ads should be concentrated in distinct breaks in between clearly defined and distinct sequences of editorial content---just like TV and radio. That way, those who want to see the ads can do so and those who dont can simply take a short break from their PC, smartphone or tablet, or switch to some other publishers website, then return for another uininterrupted content segment. This way, ad recall and other indicators of ad impact will probably increase---just as happens with short, uncluttered TV ad breaks---which, in turn will enable publishers to charge more for such ads. The alternative is to continue with the chaotic situation until, as Leonard's comment suggests, you have so many angry users blocking ads that advertisers---especially those of the branding variety---give up on digital entirely.
The carriers will force change on the advertising and publishing communities.
People own the 'pipes' and 'reservoirs' (backhaul) of mobile connectivity can also build dams.
And in the case of people like John C Malone, they can afford to play hard ball here.
This is exactly why I predict that 2016 will be the year of "Permission Marketing at Scale". Why don't we simply ask viewers before they leave a site to opt-in to future marcom content based on criteria they set. Major e-tailers started this trend this year, and many others are getting on board next year. Brands, agencies and media companies should follow.