Not open for further replies.


Staff member
Source: Adblock Plus and (a little) more: What will Google Chrome’s new ad filter actually block? We investigate...

Google has announced that it will follow the CBA’s definition for ad acceptability. From 55 types of ads, the CBA says that only nine of those ad types are egregious enough to block.

*It was not always clear where the CBA drew the line, so a few ad types tested were difficult to judge. This was especially true in two cases, both marked in the above spreadsheet with comments. We hope we were accurate in our interpretation. There weren’t many edge cases, though, so it doesn’t affect the big picture.

For example, the CBA says that the following ads and more are permissible:
You get the picture. Apparently, these new CBA standards bravely skim off the ads that may induce massive eye-gougings upon viewing.

In total, the new CBA-endorsed ad skimmer will only block 16.4 percent of the ad types listed in its white paper. In comparison, using the Acceptable Ads standard, Adblock Plus (and other ad blockers) block 51 different ad types, or 92.7 percent of those ads.

Ad filter? More like ad skimmer …

Now, in fairness to Google, they had a lot of courage to step into the ad-blocking waters at all. Most of parent company Alphabet’s revenue comes from advertising after all. We’ve always maintained our admiration for Google’s efforts, not to mention those of the CBA.

For some, Google’s double role as enforcer of CBA standards in Chrome and voting member for the CBA is a bit like the fox guarding the henhouse. Yet, looking at the bigger picture, the goals of the CBA are to:
  • improve advertising (good)
  • shield users from the worst ad experiences (also good)
What’s underpinning this is also good, because the proposed system lets users decide for themselves what they want. (“User control” is a synonym for “the internet” IMHO). I mean, users can still download ad blockers, tracking blockers, etc. on Chrome. But now, out of the box, Chrome skims nine out of 55 ad experiences off the top of the pile (not bad).
Not open for further replies.