There’s been a paradigm-shift in adblocking usage over the last few years. An inflection point has been reached. We’re now in the brutal adblocking era.

Over 70% of adblocking traffic today is people using brutal adblockers through browsers, browser-extensions, dedicated-device applications, VPNs, and network-level adblocking (that last one’s a whopper).

Let’s name names: AdGuard, AdBlocker Ultimate, Brave, Nord VPN, Surfshark VPN, 1Blocker, Purify, Pi-hole, NextDNS. Collectively, brutal adblockers like these have hundreds of millions of end-users.

They do not take any prisoners, either. They’re more than just adblockers, they’re revenue blockers. Forget programmatic Acceptable Ads. Forget plea walls. Both these solutions don’t work tor brutal adblockers. They’re obsolete.

Even worse, publishers are often unaware of the scale of the problem. Brutal adblocking is dark traffic — it’s invisible in Google Analytics and standard adblocking analytics. These technologies get blocked because they’re not fit for purpose or they’re outdated (I wrote why here).

Consequently, in a lot of cases we deal with, adblocking traffic is 2-3x larger than previously known by a publisher. It’s not unusual for a publisher to think they have a low adblocking audience of 5-10%, when it’s actually in the range of 15-25% or more.

No kidding. A recent publisher we onboarded discovered their adblocking rate was 65%. Yes, you read that correctly…. 65%. Turns out, they had a ton of traffic hiding in the shadows. This was their reaction, in emoji-form: 😱

‍

How did this happen?

The first crucial question to answer is, what is driving this new era of brutal adblocking that we now find ourselves in? It boils down to a few core levers:

• 🌐 Networks. Network-level adblocking is becoming more prevalent in workplace devices because it reduces security threats from malware and data breaches. Any device that connects to a company, government department, hospital, university, or school network that has this in place will automatically blocks ads.
• 🛍️ Bundling. Brutal adblocking is being increasingly bundled with software products that provide adjacent value. For example, with VPNs and privacy-first oriented browsers like Brave.
• 📉  Waning AdBlock and Adblock Plus. The soft adblockers AdBlock and Adblock Plus (owned by eyeo, who enable Acceptable Ads) used to command the majority of adblocked page views online. Not anymore. Brutal adblocking software is being adopted at a faster rate by consumers in the form of browser extensions and apps. Why? They're perceived to be functionally superior at blocking ads and tracking scripts than AdBlock and Adblock Plus. Consequently, the market share of AdBlock and Adblock Plus has abruptly nose-dived (we estimate to around 20-35% of total adblocking page views).

‍

‍

While these may be the levers, it’s important to ask — from a user’s perspective — why they adopt these solutions and feel the need to obtain these benefits.

‍

Symptom, not the problem

Zooming out a bit, one of the long-standing industry thinking-models about adblocking is that it’s “the symptom, not the problem.”

In a nutshell, the logic behind this argument goes a little-something like this:

“If a user adopts an adblocker, it should be treated as a valid signal — and vote of protest— that they feel disenfranchised with the digital advertising status quo. Therefore, that action is a symptom of the problem and not the problem itself; the real problem being that advertising on the non-blocked web no longer works for them as a fair value exchange”.

This avenue of thinking generally leads down a rabbit hole of post-hoc rationalizations: that ads are “too intrusive” or “too creepy” or “too data intensive” or “kill battery-life”.

Sure, there’s truth to this. And, sure, if digital advertising experiences on the open web were cleaned up, the rate of adoption of adblockers would probably be slower than it is now. There have been industry initiatives in the past which have indicated this result is possible.

But, this ignores two fundamental truths.

The first fundamental truth is that at a network-level, the end-user of the adblocker has no choice. They are blocking ads by default (and they may not even be aware of it).

The second fundamental truth is that people would rather block ads if they can — whether or not the ad is “too intrusive” or “too creepy” or something else. They’re ads, after all.

In that regard, there’s a few factors at play. None of which are that surprising:

1. People generally prefer not to see ads. While there are certain ad formats (like pre-roll video) that drive adblocking adoption more than others, many consumers would rather not see ads at all if that option is available. They’re still ads, even the nonintrusive formats. Adblockers provide an easy way to filter them all out.
2. Adblockers exist to block ads. The more effective an adblocker is perceived at blocking ads, the more users will gravitate towards that adblocker versus competitive alternatives. This is what’s happening with the flight to brutal adblockers over AdBlock and Adblock Plus.
3. Blocking ads delights customers. Adblocking packages intuitively with adjacent services such as VPNs (e.g. NordVPN) and browsers (e.g. Brave), which position themselves as privacy-first and web-browsing friendly. Combining adblocking with these services enhances their overall proposition.

In short: the primary reason people use adblockers is because adblockers exist (and they are lawful, free, and easy to use and install). The more effective and easy they are to use, the more they will be used.

Most people that download brutal adblocking software aren’t fanatics, they’d just prefer not to see ads if that option’s available. Who wouldn’t? This is why the number of active adblocking users exploded from 198m in 2015 to 912m in 2023 (PageFair/eyeo’s stats).

Don’t get me wrong, there will always be a tiny cohort of adblocker users that hate all types of ads and feel very passionately about that. You’ll find them on adblocking forums, sharing their latest blocking techniques. This cohort is an extreme minority (like <0.5%).

‍

The symptom is also the problem

It’s time to think about adblocking differently. It’s not just a symptom, it’s also a problem.

Actually, there’s two problems:

1. Bad ad experiences on the unblocked web accelerates adblocking adoption
2. Consumers and companies will block ads if they can (if it’s easy, cheap, and legal)

The solution to the first problem is obvious — but nuanced — to solve: make ad experiences tolerable in order to reduce the motivation to block ads.

The solution to the second problem is to find an agreeable middle-ground between the publisher’s need to monetize their content and the consumer’s need to consume it suitably friction-free.

Micro-payments and subscriptions (for most publishers) aren’t going to work in that regard. The only option is to-reintroduce ads. Therefore, publishers have to draw a line and serve compulsorily ads to adblocking users that are generally agreeable for both parties.

Here’s the thing: people may want want to block all ads, but there’s a clear distinction between ad formats they would ideally not see and those they find intolerable. We refer to these two categories as “Allowable ads” and “Unallowable ads”.

At Ad-Shield, we only serve Allowable ads — which is a stricter standard than Better Ads:

‍

‍

“What about Acceptable Ads”, I hear you say? This is not a viable or comprehensive strategy.

First of all, Acceptable Ads only works with 20-30% of adblocked page views (and declining).

Secondly, it benefits eyeo (the owner of AdBlock and Adblock Plus). The fee they earn from Acceptable Ads continues to expand the adoption of adblockers using it. Spoiler: usage is now at 350m users, up from 250m in 2022 (they like to brag about it).

Thirdly, Acceptable Ads does not establish a direct relationship between publishers and their adblocking audiences. Instead, publishers have a relationship with eyeo as an intermediary. Remember: they’re a for profit company. They will act to suit their shareholders’ commercial interests.

‍

Getting buy in

Our POV: publishers should take control and build bridges with their adblocking audiences. That means establishing a dialogue and getting direct buy in.

As an industry we should treat adblocker users as hand-raisers, taking steps to re-engage them with an allowable (but also mandatory) ad experience that’s mutually sustainable. There’s a big difference between being taken advantage of (all ads blocked) and being accommodating (intrusive ads blocked)

It’s time to own the relationship.

‍