Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We’re dropping Google Ads

groundup.org.za

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 617 posts

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#11

Post by notgood »

GooglyMoogly wrote: post #4
jjcm wrote: post #2

The ad driven models are slowly killing publishing. They're right in what they're saying - their competition is clickbait that just wants attention. A view is a view, and an ad will pay out the same regardless of the quality of the content on the page. I really hope we find a way to distribute payment for quality content in a better way. It's something that I've been working on personally because I like publishing co…

>A view is a view, and an ad will pay out the same regardless of the quality of the content on the page. That's not really true. Advertisers can bid on how much they want to pay for each individual impression. Advertisers will likely bid more for ads on high quality websites. Advertisers will also bid more for people willing to buy stuff.

>Advertisers will likely bid more for ads on high quality websites

Citation needed

> Advertisers will also bid more for people willing to buy stuff.

Unfortunately, there is no correlation between people willing to buy stuff and high quality content.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#12

Post by phantom_oracle »

For smaller websites (also referred to the democratization of the internet), I am sure many people may (or have) feel (felt) guilty for using an ad-blocker.

Then you see all those shitty ads for:

- finding a russian bride

- getting rich through some millionaires secret

- anti-aging remedies

- adware

and you realize that the ad-model only benefits Google and the peddlers pushing the dodgy adverts. Everyone else is losing.

People keep saying that "journalism is dying", but this industry and its ad-model isn't very "old" in historical terms. For every Business Insider that dies, the world will carry on. For quality journalism (an oxymoron of sorts) and news that matters to people and their circumstances, I assume people will keep forking out money (like they do for The Economist).

If someone smarter than myself can elaborate, how is Googles business-model for ads on 3rd-party websites sustainable for the long-term?

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#13

Post by Mz »

mevile wrote: post #6

I always imagined that some website/mobile app/service would appear that would let you buy subscriptions for access to multiple publishers at once. I think people have a hard time spending $5 here a month $10 there a month, but would spend maybe $49 for a range of access to sites. I don't know why something like that hasn't taken off yet. You could pick the sites you want access to or they could do a pay out based on…

You can also just do a tip jar model or patreon.

So far, for me, the tip jar has been more successful than ads or Patreon (though I am new to Patreon, so, time will tell). I would be happy to get rid of ads altogether (with the exception of one site, for REASONS) if I thought that would drive up tips. But I have experimented a bit and it didn't seem to drive up tips.

Then, whenever I read these discussions, there is a great deal of vitriol about the evil of ads, yet, most people don't actually want to pay for content. They just want it free. When you suggest this is a broken model and content producers also deserve compensation, the answer is typically "not my problem," basically.

As a content producer, I find it enormously frustrating to read some of the awful things that get said. It reminds me of the line in All in the Family where Archie says men are supposed to have experience before marriage and women are not and his daughter asks "Who are they supposed to get their experience with?"

My snarky son's answer: Elderly widows should be deflowering young men. It fits all the parameters of the expectations while horrifying most people.

An awful lot of people are only thinking about "I don't want ads" and that's it. They basically want it for free, then don't think about what that means for the big picture.

/rambling vent

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#14

Post by mevile »

iLoch wrote: post #9
mevile wrote: post #6

I always imagined that some website/mobile app/service would appear that would let you buy subscriptions for access to multiple publishers at once. I think people have a hard time spending $5 here a month $10 there a month, but would spend maybe $49 for a range of access to sites. I don't know why something like that hasn't taken off yet. You could pick the sites you want access to or they could do a pay out based on…

Google Contributor would be your primary competition. I think typical users just aren't ready to pay for access to regular websites.

This only works for sites that show google ads. This is not a subscription service and probably doesn't pay sites much as I am signed up for this and I pay maybe $6-$9 a month and I spend a lot of time online. Google Contributors is a way for readers to opt out of ads, it's not a way to fund sites other than to maybe opt to whitelist in an adblocker. But it's not a lot of money.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#15

Post by reaperducer »

I've been on the fence about this for a while, and after reading what GroundUp wrote, I can't agree with them more. So I think it's time for me to dump Google Ads from my sites, as well. I send Big G three million ad impressions a month, and in return I get $150 and a bunch of visual dreck that makes the site look bad. $200, if I'm lucky. And this is all U.S. traffic on an award-winning news site. I only need to sell one more local ad to more than make up for the loss, and I get the extra benefit of having only quality, relevant advertising on my site.

So to quote GroundUp: "Obviously the behemoth in Mountain View won’t miss [us], but we take some pride in saying the feeling’s mutual."

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#16

Post by nol13 »

jjcm wrote: post #2

The ad driven models are slowly killing publishing. They're right in what they're saying - their competition is clickbait that just wants attention. A view is a view, and an ad will pay out the same regardless of the quality of the content on the page. I really hope we find a way to distribute payment for quality content in a better way. It's something that I've been working on personally because I like publishing co…

I think ideal for me would be some sort of hassle free micro-payment if some form of it ever really caught on. With all the paywalls going up I really wouldn't mind paying a small bit for some of the quality content out there, but I'm not gonna sign up for a subscription to every site on the internet nor give them my info.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#17

Post by specializeded »

mevile wrote: post #6

I always imagined that some website/mobile app/service would appear that would let you buy subscriptions for access to multiple publishers at once. I think people have a hard time spending $5 here a month $10 there a month, but would spend maybe $49 for a range of access to sites. I don't know why something like that hasn't taken off yet. You could pick the sites you want access to or they could do a pay out based on…

Have you tried Blendle? It's exactly as you say towards the end, articles are ~20 cents each with lots of good publishers.

I've been using them since they launched in the US and couldn't be happier, they even offer refunds for clickbait!

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#18

Post by reaperducer »

phantom_oracle wrote: post #12

For smaller websites (also referred to the democratization of the internet), I am sure many people may (or have) feel (felt) guilty for using an ad-blocker. Then you see all those shitty ads for: - finding a russian bride - getting rich through some millionaires secret - anti-aging remedies - adware and you realize that the ad-model only benefits Google and the peddlers pushing the dodgy adverts. Everyone else is los…

Just so you know, there's this one crazy trick for getting free news without ads while Oprah refinances Obama's secret mortgage...

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#19

Post by eli »

phantom_oracle wrote: post #12

For smaller websites (also referred to the democratization of the internet), I am sure many people may (or have) feel (felt) guilty for using an ad-blocker. Then you see all those shitty ads for: - finding a russian bride - getting rich through some millionaires secret - anti-aging remedies - adware and you realize that the ad-model only benefits Google and the peddlers pushing the dodgy adverts. Everyone else is los…

With the notable exception of AdBlock Plus (which has its own problems) the big ad block plugins tend to be philosophically opposed to all ads of any type, quality or quantity. This is a bummer for sites like ours where the ads are sold directly to advertisers (no network) and are relevant to the audience and subject matter.

Re: We’re dropping Google Ads

#20

Post by dheera »

phantom_oracle wrote: post #12

For smaller websites (also referred to the democratization of the internet), I am sure many people may (or have) feel (felt) guilty for using an ad-blocker. Then you see all those shitty ads for: - finding a russian bride - getting rich through some millionaires secret - anti-aging remedies - adware and you realize that the ad-model only benefits Google and the peddlers pushing the dodgy adverts. Everyone else is los…

My attitude toward ad blockers was always "meh". I have the right to render your bits and bytes however I wish. Using an ad blocker is just modifying the rendering algorithm, much the same way as I could use a French to Russian translator, something that increases font sizes, or throwing on a custom stylesheet. I can write my own web browser, if I wish.

Some percentage of users will use ad blockers, and businesses should account for that. If it is not sustainable, new business models will be invented. One thing I've been hoping for is inventing some form of advertising that was actually fun for the user -- fun enough that they would not want to block them.

Or invent a system by which 10% of the ad revenue gets cut out to the end user. That will incentivize people to unblock ads.

Post reply on HN