They seem to have a maturity problem with the concept of sex. Get over it.

Are we completely sure that they’re not counted as hits? Does AdBlockerPlus block it before it would have been counted as a hit, or does it block it after it has already been counted?

Thanks to this little gem, I haven’t seen a Viagra or match.com ad in months!

@Paula–I, too, remember when pharmaceutical companies were prohibited from advertising–and I think things were safer then. People didn’t demand a drug till their doctors gave in (think overuse of antibiotics), and the cost of medicines was a lot lower for not having the huge ad budgets. They’re creating perceived needs now. Remember when lawyers didn’t advertise, either? Fewer frivolous lawsuits, fewer lawyer jokes. Unfortunately, those genies are out of the bottle.

@!wanda–I don’t like the ads for Requip, either, because it’s a re-packaged Parkinson’s drug that’s been on the market for a while, but as Requip, the price is inflated to pay for the advertising. Please, though, don’t assume that “restless leg syndrome” is a made-up problem. Having suffered it for almost 25 years, due to a combination of nerve damage from a back injury at age 17 and an under-chlorinated gene pool (thanks, Mom!), I can guarantee you it’s not only real, but miserable.

1. In Firefox, goto Tools–>Adblock Plus…
2. Click the italicized “Add filter…” text.
3. copy and paste this text without the quotes
“@@*pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js”
4. Hit return
5. repeat step 1-4 using this text (without the quotes):
“@@*pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/*www.thesimpledollar.com*”

The first exception will allow all ads from google on all sites. But, the other filters (assuming you are using filtersetg to auto-update your ad-algorithms) will still eliminate the ads from most (if not all) sites. So, you need to add the second exception so that when you visit The Simple Dollar, Trent’s ads come through. The only other issue is that if you visit another site from a link on Trent’s site, it’ll know it and won’t block the ads. That’s probably okay, since Trent is giving credit to the sites he links to, so it’s good to allow their ads, too. This also gives you an idea of how websites know all they know about you (i.e. where you’ve come from).

I’m not guaranteeing that some ads won’t still shine through, but it seemed to work for the few sites I visited.

Also, if you are using NoScript, you’ll have to allow googlesyndication to run scripts.

My question: is there an ethical issue with reading a favorite website through GoogleReader thereby avoiding the ads altogether? i.e. not contributing to a favored author.

If you are happy with the ads that are displayed, why let it worry you? Your readership size will utimately determine if it is truely offensive or not.

I don’t think that advertising pharmaceuticals on TV is good for public health. I think, though, that advertising the “latest and greatest” cholesterol drug, when it’s not, or making up diseases like “restless legs syndrome” in order to create a market for a drug, is far, far more unethical than shilling Viagra. Also, could you explain how Viagra ads contradict Trent’s “ethos of living with discipline and compassion for others,” more so than an ad for, say, an iPod?

As the person who emailed Trent, saying I am tired of being faced with Viagra and other stuff every time I turn on TV or go to my computer, I thank Guinness and Jayne for their comments. They understand what I feel. Clearly, everyone else here is much more savvy about computers and can block a lot more than I can. I have McAfee and an adblock, but I can’t tell you anything about them. I do know that a lot of ads get blocked, but I am still inundated with ads and spam.

I certainly don’t begrudge Trent a way to earn a living, either, and if he could put up a PayPal button, it sounds like some of the readership would support him.

If it helps people understand my position, let me explain that I am old enough to remember when prescription drugs were not advertised on TV. At all. It was considered unethical. “Personal” items were off limits, too. Underwear ads were discreet. These items simply weren’t considered appropriate for family viewing. As Jayne noted, we have become a hypersexual society, which I attribute partly to advertising (which also encourages us to go into debt, because we “deserve” stuff, “need” stuff, etc.).

I just want to be spared all the stuff that appeals to our most basic impulses for self-indulgence. The message for viagra just seemed out of tune to a financial health site, particularly since Trent “gets” the ethos of living with discipline and compassion for others.

A note to Jake Smith: “Turned off” dates me. We said this all the time in the 70s when I was a kid. It’s part of the hippie culture. Glad to supply the history lesson. ;)