Publishers warm to Google plan for Chrome ad-blocker
Restrictions on widely used internet browser could hit online advertising revenues
US and European publishers have given support to the idea of Google introducing an ad-blocker to its widely used Chrome internet browser despite fears it would hit their online advertising revenues.
Details of the technology group’s plans have not been disclosed but Google has said it held “initial conversations” on the idea with publishers.
Chrome is the dominant player in the internet browsing market with a near 60 per cent share, according to NetMarketShare. The blocker would be likely to target certain types of ads that have been found to frustrate readers, such as pop-ups and auto-playing videos.
When news of Google’s ad-blocking plan was first reported by the Wall Street Journal a fortnight ago, there were fears the tool could be used to impose a blanket ban on certain ad types, dealing a further blow to publishers who are struggling to compete with Google and Facebook for online ad revenues.
But some publishers have told the Financial Times they are encouraged by the move from the Silicon Valley group as a way to clean up online advertising.
Jay Lauf, president and publisher of Quartz, the business news website owned by Atlantic Media, told the Financial Times: “I welcome [Google’s] involvement as long as they don’t go for a nuclear option, which could have a lot of collateral damage.
“If they’re more considered and surgical, I think it has a chance to be a really positive development. There’s an opportunity to clean a lot of the junk out of the system.”
Guardian Media Group added: “We welcome any initiative that helps to create an open web where the experience of readers is put first. We have long believed in a fewer, better approach to the ads we place across our products.”
But Jason Kint, chief executive of Digital Content Next, a group that represents more than 70 major media groups including News Corp, the FT and the Washington Post, provided a note of caution.
“The world of ad blocking is as murky as they come,” he said. “Friends and enemies can easily be confused, good and evil often mistaken and interests aren’t always as they appear.”
Other publishing groups such as Axel Springer, the Telegraph and Mail Online declined to comment.
About 26 per cent of internet users have ad-blockers on their computers, according to a survey conducted by the Interactive Advertising Bureau, while about 10 per cent use ad-blockers on their phones.
Publishers and technology groups such as Google, which made almost $80bn in ad revenue in 2016, fear the growing use of ad-blockers. Google places about half of all digital advertising either on its own sites or through its own ad network, meaning it has potentially the most to lose.
The tech group says it is working with representatives from the publishing industry through the Coalition for Better Ads, an industry body that includes Google, Facebook and WPP-owned ad agency Group M as members.
The group published a survey in March that ranked the most annoying ads online and outlined new ad standards.
A Google spokesperson said: “We’ve said publicly for a while now that Google alone cannot solve the bad experiences users have online — we need a data-driven industry approach to improving ads experiences.”