Sadly, the sites that don't work on 12ft.io is growing. I keep running into this when trying to read NYT.
:(
Hate paywalls? 12ft.io is the answer
121–130 of 147 posts
Re: Hate paywalls? 12ft.io is the answer
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you rely on branding then why not just subscribe the the publisher...
Sure, but it takes time to build brands like NYT, WSJ, WaPo etc. Until then, personal credibility will have to suffice.
I feel like you're just running in a circle leading to the discovery of a free trial
Re: Hate paywalls? 12ft.io is the answer
#123I’m still waiting for micro transactions. I won’t pay $5 a month for a newspaper I might read one article from but I would gladly pay 25 cents for that one good article. How are there still minimum amounts and fees on transactions when everything is supposedly digitized and networked?
Most publishers let members "gift" articles. But only so for members.
I think the worry is that 12ft.io can "buy" the article and then have the legal claims to also distribute it as an owner through this model? I'm totally guessing
Re: Hate paywalls? 12ft.io is the answer
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know what is "one good article" and what isn't until you actually read it? There is already an increasing problem with clickbait as sites have to fight for eyeballs to get ad revenue. Making online journalism microtransaction based will completely kill whatever is left of the industry.
For 25 cents, I don't think I'd care. If I get burned on five articles at 25 cents each, I'll probably stop reading their stuff though. And that might actually provide a usable metric to their editors.
The counterpoint is that this will produce EXTREME clickbaiting
Re: Hate paywalls? 12ft.io is the answer
#125I've been getting less and less success with 12ft.io. I mostly use it on my phone. On my computer I use Bypass Paywall Clean[0] (chrome/firefox addon) which uses different tricks to access the full article. [0] https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean
Safe to install random add-ons like this?
You can install it from here instead: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bypass-paywal...
Re: Hate paywalls? 12ft.io is the answer
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know what is "one good article" and what isn't until you actually read it? There is already an increasing problem with clickbait as sites have to fight for eyeballs to get ad revenue. Making online journalism microtransaction based will completely kill whatever is left of the industry.
The "medium" model could be one way around this. The first 10% or so of the article is visible, after that you need to sign in. Or in this case, pay.
This exactly IS the paywall model, except aggregated. I doubt how expensive this kind of aggregator would be to REALLY allow these media to survive. I heard media on Apple News+ doesn’t get enough money from them.
Re: Hate paywalls? 12ft.io is the answer
#127I've been getting less and less success with 12ft.io. I mostly use it on my phone. On my computer I use Bypass Paywall Clean[0] (chrome/firefox addon) which uses different tricks to access the full article. [0] https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean
Been using this for months, it's superb.
Re: Hate paywalls? 12ft.io is the answer
#128> Paywalls offend me. The Internet exists to share knowledge with everyone across the world. You shouldn’t need a subscription, all you should need is an internet connection to access the world’s knowledge. Cool. So remind me how anyone can survive creating high quality content online? Ads? Nope. Privacy nightmare. Subscriptions? Nope. "Offensive". What next? Tips? Please. We already know most people won't pay for co…
Yeah, it's a problem. I suppose badly implemented paywalls that tech savvy people can get around but others can't is almost worse... I think we should keep searching for solutions. I'm not a huge fan of advertising, but I also don't think they have to be a privacy nightmare. I don't think there's actually strong evidence that intimately targeted advertising works significantly better than simple context-based adverti…
> So maybe non-invasive advertising could work quite well?
You'll never get that without government intervention. At a bare minimum, ignoring targeting, tracking to enable conversion analysis--which necessarily requires deanonymizing users and connecting advertising engagements with purchases--is nirvana for advertisers and they'll never want to give that up without a fight.
And that's ignoring the fact that users install ad blockers because ads are also "offensive".
> But to my mind, models that literally block those who can't pay, or are disadvantaged in some other way (not tech-savvy enough) are the worst models of all.
Why? Until the internet came along, for folks not privileged enough to be able to pay for content, there was the library, and that remains an option today (many libraries offer free access to both physical and digital newspapers, among other things).
Given that, unless the content is sponsored by the government in some way (e.g. BBC, CBC, etc), what gives individuals the right to benefit from others' work for free?
Re: Hate paywalls? 12ft.io is the answer
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
For 25 cents, I don't think I'd care. If I get burned on five articles at 25 cents each, I'll probably stop reading their stuff though. And that might actually provide a usable metric to their editors.
The counterpoint is that this will produce EXTREME clickbaiting
Will it, though? What's the likelihood that people stop visiting because the clickbait is both unrewarding and financially impactful?
I guess that's the unanswered question. If the likelihood is zero or closer to it, then yeah, clickbait suddenly directly upticks revenue, but if the likelihood is high enough, it might actually force the tide against clickbaiting.
Re: Hate paywalls? 12ft.io is the answer
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
For 25 cents, I don't think I'd care. If I get burned on five articles at 25 cents each, I'll probably stop reading their stuff though. And that might actually provide a usable metric to their editors.
The counterpoint is that this will produce EXTREME clickbaiting
That’s not the case with other paid products. I’d argue it would reduce click bait since the whole idea of click bait was created as a solution to drive more impressions on a page regardless of the quality of the material. Impressions matter because revenue comes from ads so you don’t give a shit if someone actually reads the article, you just want them to click on it or share it based on the headline. If your main revenue source was being paid by people who wanted to read the full article then you would succeed by creating articles people wanted to read. You have to show a small preview to do this but that’s standard practice now. You could also prorate by number of pages read or number of words if you wanted to be fancy.