Washington Post website denies access to users that block advertisements

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following news: Washington Post website denies access to users that block advertisements[newsimage]http://static.myce.com//images_posts/2015/09/myce-adblock-washington-post-95x75.png[/newsimage]

The Washington Post is currently not allowing users with an ad blocker to view their site.

            Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/washington-post-website-denies-access-to-users-that-block-advertisements-77313/](http://www.myce.com/news/washington-post-website-denies-access-to-users-that-block-advertisements-77313/)

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

I went to The Washington Post web site & it worked fine with my hosts file.
I didn’t see any ads .
Again sites that detect ad blocking add-ons or extensions to a browser don’t seem to have a problem with a modified hosts file.


#3

Websites that detect ad blockers and prevent me from viewing them are websites that I will no longer visit. If they think that they can strong-arm me into allowing them to shove advertisements down my throat, they’ve got another think coming.


#4

Oh no, what will I ever do, no Washington post!
I can’t stand the advertising, so I won’t turn off my ad blocker.

Seriously though, I really cannot see why we need so many online newspapers. News is everywhere, it’s almost as prolific as advertising on the web.
If the Washington post is important to people in the US, why don’t the just pay for it. after all news stands were never free.
I only turn it off when visiting forums.


#5

That rag has no content that is worth being barraged by ads to read. Heck, there is nothing worth reading even if it is ad free.


#6

I just visited the site with uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger running. The ads were block, and I had full access to all articles. (OK, so I actually only opened one article, but I wasn’t blocked!) I guess I’m harder to block for some reason, or they decided not to block people after all.


#7

Works fine here with ABP active and NoScript only allowing the main host:

@cholla: i’d love to take a look at your hosts file lol. Mind shooting me a pm?


#8

[QUOTE=cholla;2760285]I went to The Washington Post web site & it worked fine with my hosts file.
I didn’t see any ads .
Again sites that detect ad blocking add-ons or extensions to a browser don’t seem to have a problem with a modified hosts file.[/QUOTE]
Haven’t gone there yet but I use a PC hosts blocker file as well so any extra ads would be blocked before it loads.

Tested:
Went to Washington Post and loads perfectly fine. No Ads or popups or message saying can’t view site. So guess those Browser blockers are the ones they are targeting.


#9

I have a simple policy on such sites. If the site won’t allow access with an ad-blocker active with the browser, I stop visiting that site… permanently.


#10

[QUOTE=philamber;2760323]I have a simple policy on such sites. If the site won’t allow access with an ad-blocker active with the browser, I stop visiting that site… permanently.[/QUOTE]
You get around that with the PC hosts edit that blocks ahead of time from the hosts file and the Browser works just fine. This is the part alot of plugin blocker users forget it is outside of the Browser and going to the site is no problem for me or Cholla.


#11

[QUOTE=Ch3vr0n;2760319]@cholla: i’d love to take a look at your hosts file lol. Mind shooting me a pm?[/QUOTE]

I posted my hosts file in this thread 3 weeks ago.
It is the one I was using then & should have what would have blocked the Washington Post .

It is the same as the one I’m using now except I’ve made some additions for blocking some of the MS data collecting . As far as I’m concerned those are experimental right now & may not even work. MS is supposed to have hard coded the dnsapi.dll so the hosts is bypassed for telemetry & data collection. So I won’t post that one for now. It may also have some duplicates . If I get it where I think it should be I will post it.


#12

[QUOTE=philamber;2760323]I have a simple policy on such sites. If the site won’t allow access with an ad-blocker active with the browser, I stop visiting that site… permanently.[/QUOTE]

Same here.

Not that I’ve ever frequented the Washington Post but there’s very little in the way of online news that you can’t find elsewhere.

[B]Wombler[/B]


#13

[QUOTE=Wombler;2760343]Same here.

Not that I’ve ever frequented the Washington Post but there’s very little in the way of online news that you can’t find elsewhere.

[B]Wombler[/B][/QUOTE]
"[B]Not[/B]" if we become looking for news that fits what we want to hear or see. If that is the “[B]Real[/B]” reason behind not going to Washington post any replies are very disingenuous at best. If ones doesn’t or isn’t willing to look at how another site reports news -regardless if you like them or not then we limit our minds to closed mindsets and thinking “[B]Inside The Box[/B]” mentality.


#14

[QUOTE=cholla;2760325]I posted my hosts file in this thread 3 weeks ago.
It is the one I was using then & should have what would have blocked the Washington Post .

It is the same as the one I’m using now except I’ve made some additions for blocking some of the MS data collecting . As far as I’m concerned those are experimental right now & may not even work. MS is supposed to have hard coded the dnsapi.dll so the hosts is bypassed for telemetry & data collection. So I won’t post that one for now. It may also have some duplicates . If I get it where I think it should be I will post it.[/QUOTE]
Same here but I recently updated the hosts file for Sept 14.


#15

@ Ch3vr0n , You may want to read this post I added to the same thread.


#16

@cholla: an exe file, bat files, txt,… disturbing. I was talking about the %systemroot%\System32\drivers\etc\hosts one


#17

@ Ch3vr0n , I don’t know what you’re talking about .
There are none of those files in the host.zip I posted.
If you found one post it.

It is a direct copy of %systemroot%\System32\drivers\etc\hosts ,
It’s even still “Read only”.


#18

[QUOTE=Ch3vr0n;2760395]@cholla: an exe file, bat files, txt,… disturbing. I was talking about the %systemroot%\System32\drivers\etc\hosts one[/QUOTE]
That’s odd my hosts file contain none of those exe, bat it’s all a sys txt file that replaces the original hosts file itself. Where are you getting the exe, bat files at?

[QUOTE=cholla;2760396]@ Ch3vr0n , I don’t know what you’re talking about .
There are none of those files in the host.zip I posted.
If you found one post it.

It is a direct copy of %systemroot%\System32\drivers\etc\hosts ,
It’s even still “Read only”.[/QUOTE]

That’s really wierd wonder where they are looking at?


#19

It would be weird if any of those were really in the hosts file I posted.
After I thought about it I think Ch3vr0n was just jerking my chain .


#20

I’m not, got a zip file ‘housts.7z’ from the link cholla posted for me earlier