Is Firefox’s “NoScript Add on” Killing Your Online Marketing?

July 31, 2008 by Chuck | 2 Comments

My friend John Dilbeck has an interesting post on Firefox’s “No Script” add on that basically doesn’t let surfers “see” anything on your page – like email sign up forms and Google Adsense that are based on javascript applications!


Suddenly every web page monetized with Google Adsense, Chitika or designed as a “Squeeze Page” may be useless to you for those firefox users with this add on – even if they wanted, for instance, what you’re offering.

Will this be a problem for lots of marketers? It’s hard to say at this point.

Just to be sure, John’s making sure his pages have html forms for email to make sure he’s not missing sign ups.

But if this script – or one like it – is on enough browsers, the “authority” sites that wanted to provide top quality affiliate link free information  in hopes of getting pay per click revenue may find themselves victim to the sense that the “internet is free” and that people have a right to all your hard work whether you receive any compensation at all…

In Work at Home Blog

Related Posts

Related Resources


  • John Dilbeck on July 31st, 2008 at 7:14 am

    Hi Chuck,

    Thanks for linking to my post about the NoScript addon for Firefox.

    I think it’s bad enough that an addon can filter out javascript, but what about the people who turn off javascript in their browsers?

    I’ve done that when I wanted to get information fast and didn’t want to be slowed to a crawl because some pages have so many javascripts that have to be downloaded.

    If I were on broadband, I probably would not have turned off javascript, but back here in the mountains where I live, all I have available is a slow dial-up connection and a page loaded with javascripts can take (seemingly) forever to load.

    Of course, many sites don’t work properly unless javascript is enabled, so I’d turn it back on when I found the site with the information I wanted.

    I’m wondering what will happen to our online marketing if browsers offer preferences to disable some javascripts (such as ads or subscription forms) while enabling other types of scripts.

    I never really thought about this until a couple of days ago.

    Is it a serious problem? I really don’t know.

    Hope you’re well and happy.

    Act on your dream!


  • Jason on August 15th, 2008 at 9:45 am

    As a user of FireFox noscript, I just want to say that the primary reason many users employ this extension is for security. At least that’s the way I see it. Users wishing to block out ads would find AdBlock extension much more useful for that purpose.

    I basically use noscript not to block javascripts completely, but rather to filter out the ones I don’t trust. It lets you filter out which scripts you want to run, as there are many rogue scripts across the web that will damage the PC’s of unsuspecting users.

    It also lets you create a “whitelist” of completely trusted websites and scripts. The websites I go to quite often and ones that I know are trustworthy I always enable scripting on, even the advertisements. I never know when an Ad might direct me to a really useful sight or product so I keep that option open at least on trustworthy websites. And when browsing sites I’m not sure about, I enable scripting only after I verify the sight to be safe.

    It’s more of a security measure that anything else; don’t allow particular scripts to run unless they are completely safe and always allow verified scripts to run by default.

    From a marketing perspective, I also don’t think noscript will make a significant impact as these security measures provided by it are more of a burden for most end-users than anything else. It requires patience to learn and get used to, something a lot of end-users don’t have when it comes to computers. In addition, many users may not even understand the concept of scripts and subsequently won’t bother with noscript, further hindering mass-adoption of this extension.

    Just my $0.02. I hope my perspective helps.

Leave a Reply