Re: To be fair...
"these sites rely on adverts to remain free for users"
While I accept that this is the motivation for a number of websites, it doesn't mean I have to like it. Just like I understand local radio plays ads to get some income, that doesn't mean I don't immediately switch to another radio station until (at least) the ads have finished.
If these websites are so valuable in terms of the content they provide, then they could charge for it. Most of the time, of course, nobody would pay ...and the site would vanish owing to lack of money.
While this is all very sad, like a lot of stuff in the media, if nobody is prepared to pay then you have to question whether the content is worth anything to anyone other than the content (in this case, website) owners. In many cases, it isn't. Sad. But that's the hard truth. It's all for a similar reason to why ITV (for example) insist on encrypting Emmerdale and Coranation Street (actually, they encrypt everything!) over their on-demand service (thus making life very difficult for TV and set-top-box manufacturers, and making the ITV player so bloody unreliable); it's because they have an over-inflated opinion of their content's worth (nobody every bothered pirating Emmerdale or Corrie because it immediately loses its worth after it's broadcast; yesterday's Emmerdale/Corrie is today's media chip-paper, and it only had any "worth" in the first place because it gave an excuse to bombard viewers with paid-for adverts).
But I digress. The point is, people block ads because they are a pain in the arse and nobody is the least bit interested in them anyway (*). If that causes a website to fail owing to lack of cash and the website owner doesn't have the imagination to change their business model (or they think nobody will pay if they do), then you have to ask whether it matters that it fails.
And the same point applies to applications with adverts embedded in them. If you have to go to these lengths to get your application out there, then it's probably not worth anything anyway; if it was then you could sell it.
(*) Of course, the big players like Google, Amazon, Apple etc keep talking about your "enhanced experience" (or whatever bollox language they choose to use) when talking about pushing adverts on to you. They choose to completely ignore the fact that nobody actually gives a shit about their ads. If they did they would have a "bugger off" option alongside the "yes, please send me lots of pointless ads" and "yes, please send me lots of pointless adds tailored to my specific socio-economic demographic that you've cobbled together by spying on my every move around the internet" options. But they don't