Posted by Devin de Gruyl on Aug 20th, 2007
Firefox, of course, should need no introduction to anyone here. It is the de facto industry standard cross-platform web browser, boasting a “safer†and more secure WWW experience for users than Microsoft Internet Explorer (the default Windows browser that millions blindly use without knowing better alternatives exist). Chief among the reasons many users favor Firefox is its ability to block annoying ads on web pages – the kind that pop up, pop under, play annoying sounds, and just generally make nuisances of themselves in their efforts to trick you into clicking on them.
Now, it’s never been any secret that power users have long felt ambivalent at best towards the notion of advertising on the WWW. Nor has it ever been a secret that the people who make those ads have long looked at ad-blocking software as the bane of their existence, and are forever looking for ways to circumvent even the most dedicated blocker – even if it comes at a cost of making a user’s computer unstable and/or compromising its security. Thus has bred the rise of spyware, forced interstitial ads, ever-more annoying Flash ads that pop and fizzle, inline advertising masquerading as a normal hyperlink, and spam. Lots and lots of spam.
Apparently, their latest effort to convince you that you do not have the right to go through life without having your senses assaulted by obnoxious advertising is to discredit Firefox itself, either by blocking the browser entirely from some websites or just spreading anti-Firefox/Open Source propaganda.
The propaganda page, dubbed Firefox Myths, presents a long laundry list of claims Firefox users and the Mozilla Foundation have made about the leading “alternative†browser, then proceeds to “debunk†them in their own inimitable fashion. Admittedly, they do raise a few good points (particularly when it relates to IE7, which actually does address some of the infamous security holes IE6 “enjoyed,†and pointing out that Firefox does not perform as well as Opera on the Browser Acid Test), but for the most part it just comes off as a cadre of IE/Opera fans running a smear campaign that would do any Presidential candidate proud. The most hilarious “myth†they address has got to be “Firefox is not a religion,†which they proceed to “disprove†via an ersatz quote from the “Book of Mozilla†on Firefox’s about:mozilla page! When you start using intentional jokes against somebody to prove your case against them, that just reeks of desperation. (Of course, it’s entirely possible that particular “Myth/Reality†entry was itself intended as humor, which means I’d be guilty of exactly what I just accused them of… don’t you hate ambiguity sometimes?)
Most savvy Firefox users can look at this list and have a good laugh pointing out the flaws and holes in their reasoning. But sites that actively block Firefox… that’s not so much a laughing matter. Particularly when said blocking accuses them of being, in effect, content thieves. That’s pretty much what WhyFirefoxIsBlocked.com is all about. Apparently, some content providers are taking steps to ensure the ads that provide them income are in fact providing them with income by blocking software they deem to be a threat to their revenue stream. This would include AdBlock Plus, a popular Firefox plugin that prevents obnoxious ads from appearing on the user’s screen. Now, this is all well and good… except for the fact that they have blocked all Firefox users from these sites, regardless of whether or not they have the AdBlock Plus plugin installed! Apparently, the mere fact such a plugin exists is enough to write off the entire browsing platform, and redirect its users to this page reminding them that they do not, in fact, have the right to block ads (even if they’re not).
The language used on the WhyFirefoxIsBlocked.com website is gauranteed to ruffle feathers, as well:
The Mozilla Foundation and its Commercial arm, the Mozilla Corporation, has allowed and endorsed Ad Block Plus, a plug-in that blocks advertisement on web sites and also prevents site owners from blocking people using it. Software that blocks all advertisement is an infringement of the rights of web site owners and developers. Numerous web sites exist in order to provide quality content in exchange for displaying ads. Accessing the content while blocking the ads, therefore would be no less than stealing. [Emphasis mine - DdG] Millions of hard working people are being robbed of their time and effort by this type of software. Many site owners therefore install scripts that prevent people using ad blocking software from accessing their site. That is their right as the site owner to insist that the use of their resources accompanies the presence of the ads.
In other words, if you use Firefox and you block ads, you’re a content thief. Period. No excuses, no explanations, no exceptions. For that matter, even if you run Firefox without the AdBlock Plus software, you’re still guilty of enabling the “crime†of ad-free web browsing and are still blocked from viewing the site content. Doesn’t that make you feel just wonderful, knowing that your choice of software has branded you a criminal in at least somebody’s eyes?
(Hey, let’s remind these guys that IE and Opera both allow for software that performs the same function as AdBlock Plus! For that matter, we can even remind them that some people still choose to browse the WWW via textmode-only browsers such as lynx, elinks, and w3m – and ads don’t display in textmode! Aren’t slippery slopes and double standards fun?)
Naturally, the Firefox users are all up in arms over this, with many eloquent (and not so eloquent) blog posts and webitorials pointing out the flaws in their reasoning. Of the ones I’ve seen, this one from an O’Reilly blog is probably the best, as it puts the WhyFirefoxIsBlocked.com arguments under the magnifying glass and points out precisely how silly and misguided they are under close scrutiny.
(UPDATE: The WhyFirefoxIsBlocked.com domain has been traced back to one man who is a firm believer in the web-advertising business model and a reknowned detractor of Firefox and FLOSS in general. Thus far, only the websites he himself has been involved with are blocking Firefox and redirecting its users to this page. His arguments, however, are ones I’ve heard from various people who actually get paid good money to run ads on their site, so it’s not just trollish behavior on his part, and I won’t recant what I’ve said in this article. It is, however, to be classified under the heading of “net.kook” and its importance disregarded.)
(UPDATE 12:51 PM EST 20 AUG: The site was hacked a few minutes ago. It briefly reworded the text of the page into pro-Firefox propaganda and included download links to both Firefox and AdBlock Plus. As of right now the WhyFirefoxIsBlocked.com domain is down; clicking there only gives a “Wrong entry point” error. This is getting most interesting…)
Posted in geek
| email this article
If you liked that, try...
- Firefox 3 Released
- Firefox 2.0 released
- Firefox 2.0 Beta 2
- Serious Vunerability Found in Firefox
- Linux Tip: Man Pages in Firefox
Podcast RSS
University Update - HPV - The Internet vs. Firefox? UPDATED
August 20, 2007 at 3:18 pm
[...] Nile Virus The Internet vs. Firefox? UPDATED » This Summary is from an article posted at Way of the Geek on Monday, August 20, 2007 Just when [...]
Shawn M.
August 20, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Internet fights, serious business. Really, though, I’m taking food from somebody’s mouth because I’m using Firefox? That’s absurd. That’s like saying I’m stealing from the television industry when I get up and go to the kitchen or elsewhere during commercials.
Well, I guess that makes me a criminal, and I’m proud of it. A criminal that has a non-infected computer.
August 20th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
The funny thing is, this whole thing just keeps getting more and more hilarious. Thus far, only one major website - the blog of a typical hard-right fundamentalist parroting the beliefs of Robertson, Parsley, and Hagee - has elected to make use of the Firefox-blocking code.
The funny part is that a little research has turned up that it’s the same guy under an alias!