Submitted 11 months ago by kinnce_of_p3rs14@lemmus.org to mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
https://lemmus.org/pictrs/image/06326dd4-5279-4c18-b1be-dff95c329b72.webp
CNN: We can’t ask if you want to allow cookies because you’re blocking everything
Me: Which means I don’t want you to……….?
CNN: No idea, we have to ask you.
Me: I’m so strict you can’t even ask meaning………?
CNN: You….
Me: Yes?
CNN: Uh………… don’t want……
Me: Yesssss………
CNN: To miss out on us asking you.
Thos but unironically. GDPR
GDPR doesn't require them to ask if they would just not violate our privacy. In other words, it's perfectly legal to assume "no" if they have no means of asking.
The requirement to not track users with cookies does not extend to cookies that make the site work in the first place, such as those which track your login session, or your refusal of other cookies.
Hello! Would you like to destroy some evil today?
Yes, PLEASE press A a few times on this monster!
I just opened CNN on firefox with unblock origin on both mobile and desktop without issue.
I wonder if it has to do with the region you try to load it from. The message in the screenshot seems to indicate that it might.
could be that there’s been an update to the filters to deal with this issue?
seconded the success.
I can open CNN too, but once i click on an article I get the page OP has…
I viewed 3 articles, no issue. Cleared cookies & site data before hand to be sure I hadn't already allowed them at some point.
Clicking the article works fine for me.
I can confirm this behaviour, Fennec on mobile with uBlock Origin.
I’m not experiencing any of this, but my setup is insane at this point. Ublock origin with a custom bypass paywalls filter list and noscript enabled… no ads… no blocks… Just content. Using mull on android with mullvad DNS.
Same, works fine. But I don’t block cookie popups, I have consentomatic handle them instead, plus Firefox is getting that built-in, anyways.
Windows/android?
What if you refresh the page?
"We’re tracking you for your privacy 🙄
you blocked the stuff we need to protect your privacy
holy shit fuck you you lying fuck
They could be telling the truth… It’s possible that OP is in Europe and the ad blocker is blocking a GDPR cookie consent notice.
The law is done dumb. They should update it to say “the banner must always have a “reject all” button which rejects everything (including the legitimate interest) on it and it must not be hidden inside any further clicks”
I’m sick of having to search for that button under two sub menus or having to uncheck 20 check boxes. And what the hell is even “legitimate interest”? There’s nothing legitimate about any tracking at all. This phrase really offends me every time I read it.
I’ve had it happen to me for a week or two now. US based. I always just figure if a site doesn’t work with my blockers, then I really don’t need to see it.
They’re doing you a favor
“Protect your privacy” is literally why we use uBO…
“Protect your privacy from us”
No one has mentioned the good version of that site, lite.cnn.com – no ads, no bloat, works fine with UBO.
TIL!
and it’s mobile-friendly too
Honestly CNN isn’t great and this screen is just a reminder to go somewhere else.
I just hope this isn’t a trend.
Sadly, it is a trend.
I block CNN by not visiting their website.
The only CNN worth anything is CNN International, and that still works fine with all ad blockers raised. But even CNN International started pulling the same stunt, it’s not remotely good enough that I would miss it either.
CNN’s docuseries are actually incredible, but they air on Max anyway.
I had that with “I don’t care about cookies” add-on.
I disabled it and then it blocked me for being from Europe. 🤷♂️
Ironically, that message can only be shown if they are invading your privacy.
Otherwise how the FUCK do they know your brother is deciding not to display their bullshit cookie message? Clearly they’re reading some information I’d rather they didn’t have.
This is Beyond “Can I interest you in some Tracking cookies ?” , this is “You MF better put these cookies down your throat or I will shove them up your Ass”.
Do you see a similar message for other news and social media sites? My gut tells me that it’s just one of many blocklists added to your company’s firewall but they don’t have a specific message for “blocked because not work related”.
I’m getting these messages occasionally, but usually they make sense, such as when I go to online gaming sites or torrenting portals. Didn’t try porn - don’t want a call from HR. In general, our IT policies are fairly sensible; this is one of the very few outliers.
They also blocks you with the same message if you want to read an article about Bibi from Austria. If you try with the VPN, they’ll let you read it. The article: edition.cnn.com/2015/10/22/opinions/…/index.html
Works fine for me with firefox and Ublocm. What does give me this exact message though is a extention called IDontCareAboutCookies
required components that protect your privacy
Talk about doublespeak. Double plus good, eh?
No issue here.
Firefox + Ublock Origin.
Just updated my lists and working fine. Too bad im not reading CNN anymore though
so? nothing worth reading there anyway.
Well, guess we won’t visit CNN anymore 🤷
archive.is always has a backup of the current page. I stopped using CNN a few weeks ago.
If CNN wants me to use their website they need to sign a contract that says they need to eat my shit with a spoon. Legal repercussions if they violate.
With how MS Teams and now CNN have been reported here to be blocking Firefox, you know that Firefox is doing things right. If web giants are ganging up against it, it’s all the more reason to switch to it to make a statement and prevent big tech from making privacy violation the norm.
Who cares? What are you missing out on, more shit tier journalism?
Heh, we had this problem with a work product a month ago. it’s the suppress cookie popups feature.
Legislation in some areas requires people to opt in to cookies, but add blockers block the banner pop, so from a legal compliance standard they’re not in compliance even though it’s something the users are doing.
Is that actually true or is that just their legal team playing it overly safe? Because if it is true that’s incredibly stupid.
The California stuff still has yet to play out in courts but the European law covering it was actually pretty significant. And it was enough of a pain in the ass that they recently said they’re going to repeal it.
It sounds like legal teams playing it safe. Who would go to court over such a thing?
Ok, I wanna straight up sue for such blatant mass gaslighting.
Bye Felicia
“prevent this site from implementing required components that PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY” HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAAHHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH…
They’re talking about GDPR cookie consent notices, which let you opt-out of advertising cookies and only accept required cookies (for user session, so that it can tell you’re logged in). The ad blocker is blocking the consent notice itself.
lite.cnn.com
It’s literally talking about the cookie blocker specifically though, not the adblocker itself
gregorum@lemm.ee 11 months ago
INVADING YOUR PRIVACY IS REQUIRED TO PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY
#LET US IN!!!