Maybe, but that is up to the site owner to decide. Not you, me or anyone else. A website owner is a private entity.
EDIT : So basically if a site owner decides to use ads as the main income, it's his choice and his website. Just because someone disagrees with the business model, doesn't give the someone right to leech off and use the site owner's bandwidth
without paying ( blocking ads ). If you dislike a business model, don't visit the business. If you dislike a product, you don't walk into the store and toss the product out of the store and produce direct losses for the owner.
So basically if a site owner decides to use ads as the main income, it's his choice and his website. Just because someone disagrees with the business model, doesn't give the someone right to leech off and use the site owner's bandwidth without paying
( blocking ads ).
No, sorry, but I can’t agree with that.
Whether it’s commercial, government, charity, or personal... the bottom line to a website is the same... return on investment.
Exactly what the ‘return’ is, will vary depending on the type of site and the purpose it serves (e.g. in the case of a personal blog, it might just be that it makes you feel good to have it) but there always needs to be a return to justify the investment.
If blockable ads are a critical component of that return/investment equation, then the site has no future, because the reality of the environment is that they can’t be relied on to produce income. You only need to look at on-line news sites to see this hard
lesson being learnt by some very big players.
A prudent and astute owner will be well aware of that, and will only consider income from blockable ads, to be above and beyond that required for the site’s existence.
The arguments of ‘leeching’ and of not having a right to visit a site if you are not contributing via ads, are not valid... as it’s not the visitor’s problem to make the owner’s business model work.
It’s the site owner’s problem to ensure that the overall ‘return’ is sufficient to offset the ‘expense’ of non-contributing visitors.
In simplistic terms, bandwidth expense is part of the ‘cost of doing business’, and how you offset and/or justify that is up to you, but don’t be relying on blockable ads to do it for you, if you want to survive.
A crude (and perhaps not very good) analogy to this in the retail shop world, is ‘loss leader’ concept... where you have products on sale that actually cost you money. As the retailer, you know that a good proportion of people will only come into your shop
to buy those products and they will cost you money... but you don’t chase them out of the shop with a broom, or refuse to sell to them, because you also know that there will be enough people who will be attracted by that promotion and who will buy other products
(or who you can ‘sell up’) on which there are sufficient profits, to more than offset those losses.