Back in September 2007, we wrote an article on Adblock Plus, an extension for Firefox that blocks advertisements from loading on Web pages.  It was one of our hits.

It came after some controversy about a Web developer blocking Firefox because of what he perceived were problems with Ad-block… robbing him of his revenue.  But we argued that enterprises should, in fact, encourage Adblock – maybe even to make it mandatory – because each ad which isn’t served means that there’s less bandwidth taken up, which frees up more bandwidth for other applications.

But we didn’t quantify exactly how much bandwidth blocking ads would actually save.  It took AdblockPlus themselves to actually do so, in a blog post that they entitled: “Anatomy of Ads.” Using Dilbert.com as a test bed, they found that:

• Ads triple the amount of data one has to download (over 450 kB increase).


• When downloading the page the first time (without caching) the delay due to ads is not notable. However, these measurements have been made with a very good internet connection, modem users will see something very different. Also, it doesn’t consider the time for server name resolution (all names were already cached) — resolving nine server names instead of just one usually makes a huge difference.


• Dilbert.com is really good at caching, often you can go back to the main page without contacting any server at all. Unfortunately, ads pretty much destroy this advantage by requiring almost every ad server to be contacted. This means that instead of showing up almost immediately the pages take more than 3 seconds to load.

Dilbert.com also includes 8 remote JavaScript files – so you’re loading eight different servers when you just want the content on one. 

But let’s not kid ourselves – while Adblock might have some performance benefits, it wasn’t invented to improve network performance.  It was invented because Internet ads can be intrusive and abusive.

If you look at the history of mass media advertisements, the trend has more or less become one of increased unobtrusiveness.  First came show sponsorships, then came the 30-second spot – a much less annoying form of advertising.  While there are some exceptions (Head On?) the advertisements of today are as a whole less annoying than early advertisements of the 1950s.

Additionally, the next step – product placement – is a less intrusive form of advertising than commercial breaks.  Certainly, used incorrectly, they can be tacky, but correctly used, they don’t interrupt the flow of the narrative. 

Web ads have defied this tradition – getting more annoying and intrusive, with pop-ups, pop-unders, flash ads, video ads, and the aforementioned eight separate scripts.  Even content providers are frustrated by the fact that advertisers they choose to block on their own sites (because they disagree with the content or the presentation) then do an end-run around those content providers, a move equivalent to theft-of-services.

I don’t want to get on a rant here, but as an advertiser, time is valuable.  The best online ads are usually something that either adds content or information or enhances the original Web page – things like “Whopper Sacrifice.” 

I’ve gone on a rant here.  Point is that until online advertisements are going to respect that they are, in effect, selling product on “borrowed bandwidth,” they’re just going to continued to get blocked.