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

Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

contributor.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 269 posts

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#181

Post by cptskippy »

Eridrus wrote: post #175
cptskippy wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you misunderstood how this iteration of Contributor would work No, I understand perfectly well how it works. If you pay Google, then Google doesn't show you ads and it gives the Content Creator a cut. Google is part of the Ad ecosystem. Contributor not only excludes other Ad providers from participating, it also requires the Content Creator to sign up to Google's Ad ecosystem. And Google is still gathering…

> Content Creator to sign up to Google's Ad ecosystem I don't think there has been any indication of this one way or another, and I'd be sort of surprised if this is the tack they're taking. We'll see how it turns out, but it doesn't sound (to me) like they are compelling companies to show Google ads, merely providing the paywall technology. > You know god damn well this system won't work with uBlock or any other 3rd…

> I think the entire point is to get people using uBlock etc to either turn it off or to pay,

It is not an either or situation. Google wants to track you and get paid for doing so. They don't care if the money comes from you or advertisers. They do however care if they can't track you.

A contribution system could be setup completely independent of the ad serving system. That however has not been the case. With all iterations of Contributor before this, if you had Ad Blocker enabled then Contributor did not work at all.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#182

Post by BoiledCabbage »

anilshanbhag wrote: post #48
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #15

Whether it comes from Google, or someone else I believe this is the only way the web survives. Content creators need to be able to charge different amounts for different quality content. In depth, well researched reporting needs to be able to earn more than a buzzfeed article. That's not possible with a flat "per-eyeball" cost, where the revenue to the content creator is uncorrelated with the cost to create or the va…

If the time taken to read the buzzfeed article is the same as the high quality report, it is worth the same to an advertiser. The high quality report does good for the organization in terms of retention, a reader is likely to come back and read it if he finds good content.

What you're describing is exactly the problem. The high quality report has to hope to survive on secondary effects (which don't work), unlike the junk-food reporting whose cost is paid for by the single viewing.

This is what every online newspaper has been saying for over a decade as they saw this problem approaching and didn't have a way to solve it. You can't survive this way in the extremely efficient web.

Either top quality content needs to be able to pay for itself (ie charge more), or you're left with only two successful business models: make junk-food content, or off load your content creation to people willing to do it essentially for free as a hobby.

Neither of those are good destinations for the web. They work in niches, but not across the board. Ex. I don't want my newspaper to consist of only volunteer journalists doing a bit here and there in their spare time.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#183

Post by Eridrus »

cptskippy wrote: post #181
Eridrus wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Content Creator to sign up to Google's Ad ecosystem I don't think there has been any indication of this one way or another, and I'd be sort of surprised if this is the tack they're taking. We'll see how it turns out, but it doesn't sound (to me) like they are compelling companies to show Google ads, merely providing the paywall technology. > You know god damn well this system won't work with uBlock or any other 3rd…

> I think the entire point is to get people using uBlock etc to either turn it off or to pay, It is not an either or situation. Google wants to track you and get paid for doing so. They don't care if the money comes from you or advertisers. They do however care if they can't track you. A contribution system could be setup completely independent of the ad serving system. That however has not been the case. With all it…

> With all iterations of Contributor before this, if you had Ad Blocker enabled then Contributor did not work at all.

"This time is different", or at least I think this time it will be different, since the whole point is to reach users who have ad blockers enabled, I guess we'll see how it goes.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#184

Post by JustSomeNobody »

Google: Nice internet ya got there. It'd be terrible if something were to happen to it like, say, ads everywhere. But if you just give me a few dollars I'll protect ya from 'em.

Edit:

>How it works You load your pass with $5. Each time you visit a page without ads, a per-page fee is deducted from your pass to pay the creators of the website, after a small portion is kept by Google to cover the cost of running the service. The price per page is set by the creator of the site. You will be informed in advance if a site creator changes their price per page. Contributor is easy to update: change settings and add sites or remove them from your pass at any time.

I love the sound of this, I just do not like the idea that it is Google doing it. It feels ... dirty somehow. A third party doing this I have no problem with.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#185

Post by wnissen »

kemonocode wrote: post #159

Then naturally, as soon as I try to sign up for it, I get told "Contributor is not yet available in your country" as it seems to be US-only at the moment. That's okay, uBlock Origin with its whitelist I compiled with sites I know won't violate my browser with ads is still available in my country.

Don't feel bad, there are literally only 1 dozen sites that it works on, and so you probably don't care about it right now anyway.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#186

Post by BoiledCabbage »

Sir_Substance wrote: post #105
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #15

Whether it comes from Google, or someone else I believe this is the only way the web survives. Content creators need to be able to charge different amounts for different quality content. In depth, well researched reporting needs to be able to earn more than a buzzfeed article. That's not possible with a flat "per-eyeball" cost, where the revenue to the content creator is uncorrelated with the cost to create or the va…

>A model like this is necessary to support quality content online. It's totally not. People essentially enjoy creating and sharing, and love putting up quality content about things they truly give a shit about. The internet was built on people writing massive forums posts about completely stripping down Kawasaki motorbike engines, and hosting their own websites where they ramble about conditional probability. Wikiped…

> The internet was built on people writing massive forums posts about completely stripping down Kawasaki motorbike engines...

Yes the internet came about because of academics and hobbyists playing around in their spare time. We as people who often came up during that time have a habit of over-weighting that. The internet is not a side project anymore. The internet is the future of every industry - and absolutely the future of every content creation industry.

You can't expect every industry to be reduced to what can be produced by hobbyists working for free in their spare time.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#187

Post by SamBam »

catskull wrote: post #176

Wait so it only works on those 4 websites? I've only heard of Popular Mechanics, but I rarely (if ever) visit their site. If this was more like Youtube Red, I'd be all over this. I would love to pay to remove all google ads. I get that uBlock exists, but I want to support the sites I use. Unrelated: the sidenav thing is empty? WTF?

I don't understand why it doesn't work for all Google Ads.

The content creator would just like the money. They don't actually want to display the ads. If they could get the money without displaying the ads, they'd be over the moon.

Why doesn't Google make it work across all sites, and pay the sites using Google Ads the average revenue they were already getting per page view?

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#189

Post by zigzigzag »

SamBam wrote: post #187
catskull wrote: post #176

Wait so it only works on those 4 websites? I've only heard of Popular Mechanics, but I rarely (if ever) visit their site. If this was more like Youtube Red, I'd be all over this. I would love to pay to remove all google ads. I get that uBlock exists, but I want to support the sites I use. Unrelated: the sidenav thing is empty? WTF?

I don't understand why it doesn't work for all Google Ads. The content creator would just like the money. They don't actually want to display the ads. If they could get the money without displaying the ads, they'd be over the moon. Why doesn't Google make it work across all sites, and pay the sites using Google Ads the average revenue they were already getting per page view?

They did that. It was the first iteration.

The problem is that - as described above - many websites use ads from multiple networks, so actually even if you paid, most ads did not disappear. It was more or less random. Also, it turns out ads make sites a lot of money (who knew), so to get even that sketchy coverage required you to pay a LOT.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#190

Post by funkyy »

SamBam wrote: post #187
catskull wrote: post #176

Wait so it only works on those 4 websites? I've only heard of Popular Mechanics, but I rarely (if ever) visit their site. If this was more like Youtube Red, I'd be all over this. I would love to pay to remove all google ads. I get that uBlock exists, but I want to support the sites I use. Unrelated: the sidenav thing is empty? WTF?

I don't understand why it doesn't work for all Google Ads. The content creator would just like the money. They don't actually want to display the ads. If they could get the money without displaying the ads, they'd be over the moon. Why doesn't Google make it work across all sites, and pay the sites using Google Ads the average revenue they were already getting per page view?

It's bad for their brand and image. They promote their ads as least intrusive. If they are so user-friendly, why would anyone get them removed? It is simple brand management.
Post reply on HN