The effect of the iOS content blocker. Worst case scenario is an 11% decrease in revenue :
We invented a hypothetical mid-size publisher based in the United States and reliant on exchange banner ads, using private data from a variety of sources and industry data reviewed in the report, including adoption models that predict equal or greater adoption compared to desktop ad blockers.
Eight months from now, our hypothetical publisher could see a 3.7% drop in ad revenue. With astronomical content blocker adoption (3x desktop rates) driven by App Store visibility and media coverage, that number could be as high as 11%. A potentially severe setback for businesses with thin margins.
And Ben Ilfeld to predict :
A trend toward native advertising will accelerate.
But I couldn’t disagree with Ben Brooks’ position on native ads. For the most part, ads feel impersonal and unrelated to the website bearing them, as they are supposed to be tailored to the reader by Google’s algorithms. On the other side, native ads are selected and delivered by the publisher himself (here, the website or blog) based on its perceived relevance to the reader. The issue is that the reader might sense a conflict of interest or being fooled by the publisher if the product or service doesn’t delivers what is promised by the trusted pen or voice of the publisher, putting himself at unnecessary risk.
And if [John Gruber] does accept the [Apple] ad, even knowing that the has more than a decade of history for being objective about Apple — how does a reader look at Gruber’s praise of Apple now? It’s potentially devastating for the writers authenticity, and for reader trust. The entire system could crumble. Even though it seems like a logical sponsor for his site.