Watermark Church of Grand Haven has come up with an interesting solution to make sure their visitors and congregation aren’t bothered by annoying advertisements on their free version of Livestream: Adblockers.
They mention at the bottom of their experience that they are using the free version and that they recommend installing a Firefox plugin called Adblock Plus.
What do you think of this practice? Safe? Smart? Or does it potentially limit their audience by “requiring” a certain browser and add-on?
klreed189 says
I wonder if it would get them kicked off or losing the chance to broadcast for free.
austinklee says
I understand the sentiment, however, it feels like stealing to me. In a world of short-cuts and work arounds this should probably be left alone. Hopefully I'm not getting anybody all worked up with this next one: What does that say to those watching? Does it say, "We hold ourselves to the highest standards?"; "Its okay to bend the rules a little?"; "All web content should be developed for free with no ads, especially if we want to use it for God's purpose?"; "When we tell you that we encourage you to tithe to further the work of the Kingdom, feel free to find a plugin in your own life to avoid it."
So, maybe those examples were a little harsh. It just sits a little funny in my heart. I am annoyed by the ads just as much as the next guy. And I get that this church might not have an @human3rror superman coding ninja like my church does. To me it all boils down to the overall experience and how those visiting online experience your church. This includes content, design, delivery, and even making sure that your use of free internet tools doesn't cause someone to be distracted by an "is it okay for the church to do that?" thought.
Man…longest post ever…sorry for hogging the space!
human3rror says
good points here though dude. interesting work-around. but is it the “right” kind?
human3rror says
good points here though dude. interesting work-around. but is it the “right” kind?
human3rror says
good points here though dude. interesting work-around. but is it the “right” kind?
austinklee says
Yeah, I see this a lot in my work with lots of orgs in different sectors. They jump on the next big thing without assessing how it can and should fit within their overall strategy and then they can end up as a conversation here! Ha.
klreed189 says
This is a great response. Something that I wanted to say but did not have the words to articulate. Good stuff.
The question that comes to my mind as I read you response is how much do we use things to our benefits and don't look at the consequences or maybe the message of what we are doing. I think it is pretty easy to tailor things our way and do what we think is good and can get pretty upset when someone else says they have a problem with it.
I follow Brad Zimmerman from watermark church and I do not think that was his objective. He is a big advocate of free great resources and I think he was simply trying to say "hey if these adds annoy you get rid of them here"
But I think it could be interpreted as me coming on church crunch and telling everyone through comments to not listen to John and what he is "selling"
austinklee says
There is definitely a difference between constructive and destructive criticism. Its interesting that no one has really answered John's original question about it being safe/smart to direct to one browser. We have all instantly been distracted by the Adblock Plus link.
I guess that is my real point. In a way (to use John's favorite analogy about technology being a tool) the "tools" being used to fix the Ad distraction could actually cause more problems.
So to answer John's question: Who isn't using Firefox? Ha!
klreed189 says
I would love to see on church websites "If you are using internet explorer stop everything right now and switch your browser immediately. We here at _____ Church believe Jesus used Firefox and therefore fully endorse firefox and all of its wonderful plugins"
HA
austinklee says
Maybe we can make T-Shirts that say: "Jesus was Open-Source" And have Jesus with a Firefox logo on a chain? Or would that be crossing some kind of line?
klreed189 says
I am sure that someone has beat us to the punch. I am pretty sure that Jesus is on everything. But it would be funny to have a shirt that said Jesus used firefox and so do I.
Or Jesus blogs with WordPress and so do I.
Brad_Parler says
Reading this begged me to do a few quick google searches – to find some crazy stuff out there! To respond the the original question posed – I don't think that it's the right thing to suggest the end user removes the advert via plugin – when the church should provide a better UX by licensing the service.
There should be some user training, but not so that they can save a few bucks! That's just kind of shady.
^~~^
Jeff says
I share the same sentiments as the people above. This feels like steeling and makes me sad to see a church promoting it.
Eric Granata says
I feel it is stealing and reflects poorly on the Church. If it were me in the position of Watermark, I would either leave the ads or just use Vimeo and forget about live streaming if it is not worth the investment to offer it without ads.
Perhaps they could point people to the ad blocking plugin in a less official manner?
stephenbateman says
it's kind of a reality of the business model. I think it's unfair to Mogulus/Livestream to try and subvert their ads as a producer.
I'm wondering why they decided to have an "internet campus", but don't want to pay for it. Livestream isn't cheap, but if it's not important enough for the $$, should it be dropped in favor of something else? I think so.
Brad Zimmerman says
Great thoughts everyone,
I am the creative communications director at Watermark Church in Grand Haven MI and host of ChurchMediaDesign.tv . Before you all throw me under the bus I would like to let you know our strategy and thoughts behind our move.
First of we wanted to create a Online gathering so that people apart of our community could connect to the local body when they are unable to come in person. Also we created this to be an invite tool for people to tell there friends about so they can check out what church is like before showing up. Poeple from around the world can show up but it is not our purpose in having an online gathering.
We wanted to test the waters and see how many people would connect to an online gathering and make sure it was something that fit our community, before we put a lot of resources into it. So when we looked at what it would take to make this happen livestream came to mind. Our church is under 300 people and my yearly budget is is $750. So we decided to go with the free version of livestream.
This is when the thought came to mind, "hey if people don't want to see ads you can install adblock plus". I also wanted to let people know we were using a free ad supported service, so they would understand why there were ads. And as far as i can tell only myself and a few others on staff have installed the plugin, out the 10 – 30 people who show up online each week I have heard feedback along the lines of "the ads really weren't a big deal to me".
In the future if the numbers of our online gathering grow, we WILL move to a premium service at either livestream or ustream.
If you have any further questions I would love to answer them twitter.com/cmdtv or [email protected]
klreed189 says
Good stuff Brad. Good explanation.
benjizimmerman says
Great response Brad. I just love what you do for $750 a year. Sometimes I just laugh to think about how much Central, Northpoint, and all the others in the top 100 sized churches spend on a WEEKEND, let alone a YEAR! Proud of you bro.
human3rror says
thanks for your thoughts. 😉 and for stopping by. love what you guys are doing.
Greg says
Intentionally blocking a service's fee model just so you can use it ad free FOR free seems kinda shady to me. What kind of image is that portraying of the church. Yep…bunch of hypocrites…see, I told you they were no different than the kid illegally downloading music down the street.
Our church is small and we use the free Ustream model. Yes, there are ads, but paying for a paid delivery mechanism just isn't in the budget yet. Then why do we do it? Availability. We have members and visitors with work schedules they cannot change. So, they watch when they can. Also, we've gotten great feedback from parents that have stayed home with sick kids…they can still participate.
We're no Lifechurch by any stretch, but we are trying to provide options to members and visitors that want to stay connected but can't due to life circumstances (work, sickness, etc). BTW, our users have told us it's pretty easy to ignore the adverts if you're paying attention 🙂
Brad Zimmerman says
Greg, we are not intentionally blocking ads, we have no control over the ads that are brought onto our web page. The end user has to block the ad. We are just mentioning that you can block the ad if you want to. This is the same as Tivo offering away to skip commercials.
Greg says
I see your point…but do we not reach a point of splitting hairs? I'm just asking…not making a declarative statement.
The question I have is "How is it perceived by people visiting that site…regardless of their faith status?"
The Open Source side of me says..woohoo FTW. The other side says….um, but that's how that company is able to cover costs to offer the free service. They depend on ad revenue. Helping users discover how to block that is potentially shorting that company from revenue.
Brad Zimmerman says
As of right now I don't know any people who have installed adblock because of our link. Most people say the ads arn't a big deal. They are used to them online.
Rich Emery says
As a church media director myself I am fully on the same page as Brad, I have watched parts of there livestream and I did not mind the ads they are not distracting but on the other had it is nice to know that he is still letting people know of a free resource to get rid of ads if you really don't want to seen them. I know I use adblock plus all the time and I'm sure that there is stuff on this site that I have blocked.
Hearthesound says
I am dumbfounded at how legalistic this discussion among believers has become. These discussions which take our eyes off of the focus and puts it on something that is small and unproductive. You may have a stance on how Watermark has approached this, and that is fine. My problem with those stances is when people see the legalistic detail and get caught up with that and don't see the end goal and the people it touches.
It angers me slightly to see that this has even become a topic of discussion. When did the online Church become a place for condemnation? It seems the online Church should be a place for encouragement and cheering on our fellow brothers in Christ, not publicly trying to rile their feathers.
I have to say, a budget of $750 a year is not much, and what they do with that is pretty amazing. If Watermark chooses to recommend something that keeps the Viagra & KY adds off the screen while I am watching online, then I would WELCOME that!! I do not at all think it reflects their integrity or what they are trying to portray, I only think it shows consideration that yes, they realize that there are downsides to the free product and they are offering an OPTIONAL way out of them as they test this out. As Brad said, isnt' that what TIVO & DVR do?
Hearthesound says
I am dumbfounded at how legalistic this discussion among believers has become. These discussions which take our eyes off of the focus and puts it on something that is small and unproductive. You may have a stance on how Watermark has approached this, and that is fine. My problem with those stances is when people see the legalistic detail and get caught up with that and don't see the end goal and the people it touches.
Alex Asay says
This comment is always my favorite because it comes after a great conversation has started and slams everyone for debating a something so small like how one of the, TEN COMMANDMENTS applies to modern situations. Whoa is you who are week hearted! Whoa is you who have perverted love to be kindness!
-to clear all doubt that was satire
Hearthesound says
Because when did the online church become a place of condemnation? Shouldn't it be a place for encouragement and cheering? Not a place to rile ones feathers or cast judgment?
I have to say, I WELCOME their suggestion to block the Viagra & KY ads that have come up while watching church online!