Should we use ad blockers to protect our privacy and peace of mind online, even if it means taking money away from publishers that depend on ad revenue? Manoush sat down last week with journalist Casey Johnston to discuss the growing ethical dilemma, and tons of listeners chimed in with their own ad-blocking philosophies.  We thought number of the responses were really useful – so useful, in fact, that we wanted to share them further. Here are just a handful of the many opinions out there. Please, usher in a golden age of content: Might this mean new focus on producing high-quality content so publishers get white listed, @NoteToSelf? A writer with her fingers crossed. — Sarah Aylward (@sarah_golden) September 26, 2015 Sometimes, the ads themselves aren’t the culprit: “The most objectionable part of advertising is cross-site tracking. A while back the EFF released an ad[d]-on called Privacy Badger. It was not an ad blocker. Instead, it observed the behavior of the various services the web sites you visit use, and it only blocked a service if it detected that service tracking you across different domains. The effect after about a week of having this "ad" blocker installed? Almost all of my browsing was completely ad-free.” - Matt McMahon “I have no problem with advertising. It's the engine of our culture industry. I have a problem with a consumer surveillance industry that we have no basis to trust….Why can't we review and correct our browsing history profile? Why can't we have any agency with our identity and behavior data? Do we need the equivalent of a credit report for the adtech industry?” - Dave Carroll from Brooklyn, NY (read more from Dave here) Until subscriptions mean you don't see ads, ad blockers remain tempting: “[M]ost sites that have fairly successful paywalls (NYTimes, WSJ, Washington Post, etc.) do not give you a different experience if you pay for them. You still get all the annoying ads despite your subscription. While I understand that subscriptions don't pay for the full cost of running the site, for my most-used sites I would happily pay even more to get an ad-free experience. But, since that isn't an option, I'll pay what they let me pay for access and then use an ad blocker to get the experience I ultimately desire.” - Michael S. from Silver Spring, MD Where Internet access is limited, ads are the first to go: “Finally! Yes absolutely yes I will be using mobile ad blockers, especially since they help me not hit my data limits. Advertisers want me to unblock? Quit hogging the bandwidth. If you want to know what that's like, come rural, where your internet options are limited and every byte you use is expensive. Not everyone lives in NYC.” - Justme from South Carolina Maybe we should all take a look at Google Contributor: “Google Contributor...is a system through which you can allot a certain amount of money on a monthly basis that will be used to pay the sites you visit for the ads you do not see. It is in beta (as are most Google products) and it only supports a specific ad network (Google's). I think it's a great way to support the sites you use.” - Matthew Fry from Salt Lake City, Utah Or the 'Ethical Ad Blocker' blunt force: @Not...