116

I'm seeing this annoying animated advertisement on Music SE. Somehow saving the gif was impossible, so I recreated it as well as I could from screenshots (first image). The actual thing is even more jumpy and annoying, and the black button changes size a couple of times.

GIF of animated ad

screenshot of video ad

Update: I was just shown a video (not a gif animation) advertisement for fitness clothing; as you can see in this screenshot (second image), the camera angles are far from subtle, and the whole video borders on being NSFW.

Improve this question
12
  • 71
    Get an ad blocker. SE has said in the past they're going to let animated ads be a part of their horrible ad experiment
    – Zoe - Save the data dump
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 6:19
  • 2
    see the end of the first post of github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158 in case you need suggestions. For safari users in trouble, georgegarside.com/blog/macos/…
    – anki
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 12:16
  • 2
    FYI, Fisher Investments is a notorious US investment fund whose name is synonymous with "underperform, sometimes lose money". MotleyFool 2016: Three money managers failing to get the job done 1) Ken Fisher
    – smci
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 23:13
  • 1
    @smci I spent 30 seconds googling them and found nothing but complaints about their aggressive marketing and sales strategies :-)
    – user621031
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 23:16
  • 6
    I mean, ads for herbal Viagra are less disreputable and have higher customer satisfaction.
    – smci
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 23:21
  • 3
    Looking forward to winning big bucks by punching a monkey!
    – Sklivvz Mod
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 0:25
  • 4
    Butt through pants isn't really NSFW but yeah, many people won't like seeing it jumping at them in a site they considered professional.
    – Shadow Wizard
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 8:40
  • 2
    @Shadow If you passed someone's desk and saw a few seconds of it on their screen, you'd think they were watching that infamous Eric Prydz "Call On Me" video :-)
    – user621031
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 8:46
  • Hmm... well really need to see it as gif/vid then, as image it's really not that bad. Using dev tools of the browser you should be able to get the video source, i.e. the URL used to show it.
    – Shadow Wizard
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 8:47
  • 7
    So you have to work on your pension and your butt. I would say that is pretty well targetted ... ;)
    – rene Mod
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 10:19
  • 2
    I had an ad for bras, complete with lots of helpful arrows to said bra. Makes your booty ad look tame
    – Machavity
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 14:02
  • 3
    @Machavity It wasn't just booty, it was an all-areas pervy zoomfest :-)
    – user621031
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 14:08

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
-151

We do intend to display animated ads on Stack Exchange. However, jarring and wiggling ads will be blocked and removed from our properties. Thank you for reporting.

(Editor's note: The advertising guidelines have since been changed to categorically disallow animated ads.)

Improve this answer
20
  • 81
    In my own point of view, all animated ads are jarring, and I always see them wiggling. I may be in the wrong here, but you may want to clarify where you put the limit between acceptable animated ads and jarring animated ads, so we don't waste time reporting things you deem acceptable (and you don't waste time telling us they're acceptable). Just a few examples could be useful here.
    – dim
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 11:45
  • 57
    Thanks for finally admitting open mouthed that you allow animated ads now. What about the ad content? What are the limits? Viagra ads are allowed? (I'm totally serious)
    – Shadow Wizard
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 11:49
  • 67
    You might be interested in knowing that animated ads (not on Stack Exchange sites, but on the Internet in general) are the reason why I installed an ad blocker, and why I basically never turn it off for any site. Your answer has told me that it would be VERY unwise for me to change my policy w.r.t. SE. In other words, your decision to allow animated ads is one reason why you're not getting any ad revenue from me. (Not the only one, but it might be the only one for other users),
    – rmunn
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 11:50
  • 1
    What there is still ads? Why m'I not getting any since I reported NSFW ads? Did they black list because I reported too mutch ads? Did you black listed me?
    – xdtTransform
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 12:49
  • @xdtTransform Which site are you talking about? Visit others maybe? Where you have less than 200 rep
    – anki
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 14:02
  • @ankii, that's suspicious. For all sites, with less than 200 rep, I have No ads. My selenium is get clicking all HNQ first page with a small account, using edge (no adblock on edge) and nothing cames up. Either they black listed my self or disable for french user.
    – xdtTransform
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 14:45
  • 12
    If you're going to compromise on this, when can we expect you to compromise on ads with audio or video, background ads, or popups? Where are the limits? Are there any?
    – user202316
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 20:48
  • 40
    So much for years of promising this will never happen. Too bad stevvve isn't around anymore.
    – Oded
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 21:34
  • 17
    "jarring and wiggling ads will be blocked and removed from our properties" - only when reported by users and then followed up manually by staff, as previously noted here?: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333536/…
    – Samuel Liew
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 23:42
  • 1
    FYI, they've stated this a while ago. This isn't a new policy change, nor one that had gone unnoticed. /cc @Shadow
    – Zoe - Save the data dump
    Commented Oct 3, 2019 at 7:39
  • 4
    @PrincessOlivia it wasn't clear if they're going to allow animated ads. They never replied to such questions and kept it all very vague. So the fact they say it out aloud "We now allow animated ads" is totally new. Same with viagra ads: as you see they aren't going to reply, and I suspect that at some point we'll see such ads, followed by "Hello, yes we allow viagra ads now across the network. Thanks for watching those ads." BTW, think you meant to reply to Steven, not me? (He asked about the policy change)
    – Shadow Wizard
    Commented Oct 3, 2019 at 9:41
  • 3
    For many years I had AdBlock. I removed it about 2 years ago, partially to help support this site, and others like it. It's just been re-installed. SE will not be getting whitelisted.
    – Tim
    Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 0:07
  • 6
    @TerryGuyton-Bradley I updated the question with a borderline-nsfw video (not animation) ad I was just shown on Music SE.
    – user621031
    Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 22:08
  • 7
    I ask again - how is allowing animated ads consistent with claiming to care about accessibility? SE is deliberately choosing to violate WCAG 2.2.2 after claiming to be working towards full compliance.
    – autistOfSpot
    Commented Oct 7, 2019 at 5:11
  • 2
    @sonic do you have a timeline of when were they revised?
    – Braiam
    Commented Mar 24, 2020 at 22:41
81

SE has already subverted their no animated ads policy in the past few months, which finally led me into installing AdBlock Plus.

I think it's time for everyone to enable their ad blocker on SE now, had anyone disabled it before.

Oh what? NSFW video??? Are we going to see more than 15k bottles of Viagra from Kenya??? Where's your stand? Please, Stack Exchange, seriously, hold your ground on the "no animated ads" policy.

Improve this answer
21
  • 19
    Is discussing the merits of AB+ versus uBo on-topic for this comment chain? If so, I'm going pro-uBo
    – John Dvorak
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 12:15
  • 2
    @JohnDvorak I wasn't a fan of blockers before and the only item in my knowledge was AB+. Thanks for the suggestion of uBO.
    – iBug says Reinstate Monica
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 12:17
  • as I commented above too.. github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158 @JohnDvorak It has some suggestions and comparisons in the end.
    – anki
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 12:17
  • 12
    @iBug companies can pay AB+ to have their ads whitelisted
    – OrangeDog
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 12:26
  • 4
    @OrangeDog ... which is an optional setting that literally takes 2 clicks to disable (Settings -> uncheck "Allow Acceptable Ads"). I for one like that functionality (even though I no longer have it enabled either), because there are rules about how those "acceptable adds" should look, and it motivates advertisers to make their adds less obnoxious.
    – Disenchanted Lurker
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 12:29
  • @InquisitiveLurker in principal many prefer to use a plugin that doesn't have vested commercial interests. Many other plugins have also ended up being sold and converted to malware.
    – OrangeDog
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 12:32
  • 1
    @InquisitiveLurker It's optional for now. How long until it's not, and you get, "acceptable ads", whether you like it or not? It's not a good idea to trust a company to stay the course. I didn't think they'd allow ads in the first place.
    – fbueckert
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 13:19
  • I find that Privacy Badger does an acceptable job of blocking ads. When SE changed from hosting its own ads to using an ad network, Privacy Badger decided that it was time to start blocking those ads.
    – Mark
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 19:38
  • No, they didn't. I'm really not on their side right now, but your link specifically mentions Stack Overflow only. Let's not lose sight of objectivity even if there's a hell of a lot of ill-will about.
    – roganjosh
    Commented Oct 2, 2019 at 23:25
  • 1
    @roganjosh What about another link?
    – iBug says Reinstate Monica
    Commented Oct 3, 2019 at 0:44
  • When did SE start allowing animated ads?
    – Stevoisiak
    Commented Oct 3, 2019 at 4:27
  • @iBug that link doesn't really show any announcement, other than Terry's answer above, since it just refers back to this question.
    – JAD
    Commented Oct 3, 2019 at 7:03
  • 4
    Don't install Adblock Plus, get uBlock Origin instead. It's lighter and does more to protect you. In particular, ABP accepts bribes to let some ads through.
    – user612952
    Commented Oct 3, 2019 at 8:58
  • 8
    Go with Privacy Badger. It auto blocked SE’s new ads based on the presence of trackers. It ignored their previous static ads. Just right. (To oversimplify, once it sees the same resource on three different domains, it recognizes it as a tracker and blocks it.)
    – Wildcard
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 0:33
  • 4
    @Wildcard: It is telling. AdBlock Plus selectively blocks ads, uBlock Origin blocks ads. I understand there are reasons why some believe the first alternative is better, but - there's no basis for you calling the second approach "shady".
    – einpoklum
    Commented Oct 6, 2019 at 16:36
6

I work for a large US-based organization and regularly use an ad-blocker with some limited white-listing. Ads like the second example (fitness attire) would be considered objectionable by some of my colleagues.

Stack Exchange really needs to be aware of what advertising they are allowing on the network.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.