The idea of blocking ads on websites is a bit contentious. Some argue that some ads are intrusive and hinder the experience, but since it would be hard to block ads on a per-ad basis, blanketing all ads seems to be a solution. Some argue that it is wrong as it takes away money/revenue from publishers who rely on these ads.
There are alternatives, such as paywalls but unless you frequent the website, does it make sense to pay a monthly/yearly subscription just for one or two articles? Obviously not, which is why the folks behind AdBlock Plus have come up with a solution by teaming up with micro-transaction specialist Flattr.
The new service is called Flattr Plus and basically it tracks your browsing activity, and based on your activity it knows which sites you frequent often and from there, it will donate an amount based on how often you frequent it, with users deciding how much they want to pay the publisher. This means if you think that visiting a particular website is worth $10 a month, then you pay $10, and so on.
This is different from the whitelisting feature of AdBlock Plus in which companies pay AdBlock Plus to unblock its ads. Flattr will require publishers to sign up for it and will be taking a 10% of the monthly subscriptions while the rest will go to the website. It’s an interesting approach but whether or not it will take remains to be seen, but what do you guys think? Are donations the new ways publishers will make money in place of ads?