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

I Pay for News; Why Do I Still See Intrusive Ads? (2017)

kirkville.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 192 posts

Re: I Pay for News; Why Do I Still See Intrusive Ads? (2017)

#111

Post by isostatic »

izacus wrote: post #16
pixelmonkey wrote: post #4

The answer may not be pleasing, but it's true: because "paid subscribers" represent a valuable advertising demographic/segment. They are nearly certain you are human traffic, and you have enough disposable income that you pay for news.

You can pretty much make this argument for everything - Ferraris should be plastered by LCDs with ads then. Business class airplanes filled with blinking video ads. Entrances to highend butiques crowded with people pushing ad leaflets into rich peoples hands.... Why is it acceptable on the web?

Buy a cheap computer and you get (or at least used to) tons of shovelware. Buy a decent one and you don't.

Re: I Pay for News; Why Do I Still See Intrusive Ads? (2017)

#112

Post by djrogers »

The very publication you’re subscribing to also shows ads to it’s print subscribers. I don’t think ther was ever an implicit promise that subscriptions remove ads, I’m not even sure why you’d expect that from a publication that’s been doing it that way for decades...

Re: I Pay for News; Why Do I Still See Intrusive Ads? (2017)

#113

Post by reilly3000 »

If newspapers could have a woeking business model without advertising I'm sure many would. The theory on the web is that if you take away ads for paid subscribers you'll not be able to ever add them back. Personally a cheaper subscription with an ad-lite, or tracking-free(GDPR opt out style) experience and a full price subscription for no ads seems like a fair deal. Thoughts? Disclosure: I work at a comscore 50 publisher. We are currently ad only and designing a subscription product so feedback is very welcome and timely.

Re: I Pay for News; Why Do I Still See Intrusive Ads? (2017)

#114

Post by kurtisc »

expertentipp wrote: post #86
sixdimensional wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cable television being another completely obvious one, you literally pay to be advertised to, and for the ability to fast forward through ads.

Public media and TV in Europe, including the one with the largest budget on the entire planet - German, play and display ads even though are sponsored from compulsory per-household fees.

The BBC often congratulates itself on not showing ads. Instead, every radio show is 50% 'trailers' for other BBC things which you'll hear half a dozen times by the end of a workday.

Re: I Pay for News; Why Do I Still See Intrusive Ads? (2017)

#115

Post by kurtisc »

pleasecalllater wrote: post #75
izacus wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can pretty much make this argument for everything - Ferraris should be plastered by LCDs with ads then. Business class airplanes filled with blinking video ads. Entrances to highend butiques crowded with people pushing ad leaflets into rich peoples hands.... Why is it acceptable on the web?

In the Ferrari case, you just got one huge expensive advertisement of the company. Just because you are not famous. If you'd be famous, then the Ferrari would pay you for wearing their logo. If you are not, you have to pay them lots of money for the same.

And if you want the models that get pre-allocated, you'd better get an Instagram following.

Re: I Pay for News; Why Do I Still See Intrusive Ads? (2017)

#116

Post by redleggedfrog »

pixelmonkey wrote: post #4

The answer may not be pleasing, but it's true: because "paid subscribers" represent a valuable advertising demographic/segment. They are nearly certain you are human traffic, and you have enough disposable income that you pay for news.

Don't sh*t where you eat, newspapers.

Eventually, you'll get sick, and die.

Re: I Pay for News; Why Do I Still See Intrusive Ads? (2017)

#117

Post by Rjevski »

JasonFruit wrote: post #2

There are ads in the paper newspaper I subscribe to as well. Real reporting and quality writing don't come cheaply, and that hasn't changed just because the delivery method did. Probably neither the author nor I would be willing to pay for a subscription without ad subsidies.

Nobody has a problem with paper or paper-like ads, aka ads don’t stalk you, that the newspaper has actually vetted, and is happy to have its name associated with.

The problem is that web ads are nothing like that. They are orders of magnitude more scummy, can’t be vetted in advance and stalk the shit out of you in order to serve you “better” ads next time, whatever the hell “better” means in advertiser’s perverted minds.

Re: I Pay for News; Why Do I Still See Intrusive Ads? (2017)

#119

Post by monksy »

radoslawc wrote: post #69
izacus wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can pretty much make this argument for everything - Ferraris should be plastered by LCDs with ads then. Business class airplanes filled with blinking video ads. Entrances to highend butiques crowded with people pushing ad leaflets into rich peoples hands.... Why is it acceptable on the web?

I don't know if Ferraris sold here have this, but many cars sold in Poland have licence plate frame with dealer's name and contact even though you have no agreement with them to advertise their company when you're buying new car. For some (Mitsubishi iirc) they put some kind of semi translucent sticker on your trunk with dealer's name about 2 x 3 inches.

Most dealers in the US do this via the license plate frame or stickers on the back. I think most people don't realize that you can remove them (and should). There should be some kind of rent payment for having it on your car.

Re: I Pay for News; Why Do I Still See Intrusive Ads? (2017)

#120

Post by matheusmoreira »

JasonFruit wrote: post #2

There are ads in the paper newspaper I subscribe to as well. Real reporting and quality writing don't come cheaply, and that hasn't changed just because the delivery method did. Probably neither the author nor I would be willing to pay for a subscription without ad subsidies.

Printed ads aren't malware vectors.
Post reply on HN