said by Blackbird:If someone is going to put up a website, they are responsible for whatever is presented there - including what appears in any ad-spaces used to fund the site. If they won't face their responsibility with meaningful guarantees and due diligence, then they need to deal with the consequences: user ad-blocking and/or user avoidance of their site. Certainly advertising companies are responsible as well, but the buck starts at the site: it is their responsibility to assure they accept advertising only from advertisers themselves willing to meaningfully guarantee the cleanliness of each and every ad they've sub-contracted for.
If brick-and-mortar stores harbored in-store kiosks that endangered those who entered the store premises, be assured successful lawsuits would soon abound, as well as widespread customer avoidance of the store. It's the lack of legal resort for drive-by victims that leads many users to adopt ad-blocking. Message to websites and advertisers: stop whining about ad-blockers; make (and keep) your sites safe or live with the consequences.
It is amazing how on the net the websites blame Us the users for costing them revenue and claim the adnetworks should be who keeps the house clean.
In every other sector the General Contractor is where the buck stops when customers question the quality. If I buy a car and the alternator catches fire in my new car, I do not go to AC-Delco I go the Chevy dealer and expect them to own the problem because I expected GM to have sourced a quality part.
If you get a house built and the kitchen tile looks like absolute shit and cracks on its own, you go to the GC because they should have verified the work of the tile guy.
but on the net... It seems the GC feels its up to the user to protect themselves.
