61–70 of 246 posts
Disappointed in you Jeremy. Its fair for many here to complain about some of the online advertising practices of publishers. However the viable alternative it to pivot to some form of subscription model. Its a hard transition and many orgs are making risky changes to do better. Extensions like these are a step backwards. If you value the work you should support it. See bio for usual disclaimers
Disappointed in you Jeremy. Its fair for many here to complain about some of the online advertising practices of publishers. However the viable alternative it to pivot to some form of subscription model. Its a hard transition and many orgs are making risky changes to do better. Extensions like these are a step backwards. If you value the work you should support it. See bio for usual disclaimers
This is a positive thing has been made, and I too have worked at publishers. You can't control these things and this tool prevents a user from having to jump through hoops to use a feature which is publicly available. Well done. You want your geek customers to have some chance of once-again enjoying reading these sites so let them back on them.
However I would much rather spend my time building new features then having to find ways to ensure a paywall is not circumvented.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am a working professional but I have always resisted buying a subscription because I don't want one single publication to become my de facto news source. I would love if I could pay $20 to $30 per month to some aggregator that lets me read articles from Al Jazeera, NY Times, WSJ, BBC, and a selection of other diverse sources.
I like Circa News (take my money please!) because they aggregate news from a variety of sources and present news items in small bit sized chunks listing facts or statements. They also link to the appropriate sources. edit: and you can follow news stories to get updates when new information is available.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am a working professional but I have always resisted buying a subscription because I don't want one single publication to become my de facto news source. I would love if I could pay $20 to $30 per month to some aggregator that lets me read articles from Al Jazeera, NY Times, WSJ, BBC, and a selection of other diverse sources.
I like Circa News (take my money please!) because they aggregate news from a variety of sources and present news items in small bit sized chunks listing facts or statements. They also link to the appropriate sources. edit: and you can follow news stories to get updates when new information is available.
Disappointed in you Jeremy. Its fair for many here to complain about some of the online advertising practices of publishers. However the viable alternative it to pivot to some form of subscription model. Its a hard transition and many orgs are making risky changes to do better. Extensions like these are a step backwards. If you value the work you should support it. See bio for usual disclaimers
Disappointed in you Jeremy. Its fair for many here to complain about some of the online advertising practices of publishers. However the viable alternative it to pivot to some form of subscription model. Its a hard transition and many orgs are making risky changes to do better. Extensions like these are a step backwards. If you value the work you should support it. See bio for usual disclaimers
As far as I'm concerned people that let google index their site and try to paywall everyone else are the ones abusing the system.
I'm reduced to going to facebook and sending a message to myself with the url so I can click on it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry to hear that, Michael. Subscription models are great, and paywalls are great. What's not so great is creating an internet where if you use our Trusted Corporate Partner™ you're allowed to view a public webpage, and if you come from anywhere less privileged on the internet, you're not. That's not sustainable. Lest we fall into a vortex where you're only allowed to browse the public web by logging in through Face…
... if you use our Trusted Corporate Partner™ No. Not like that. Basically, its Google saying publishes must do this or they won't send traffic their way (via search result / SEO) Its not publishers saying use Google over Bing over Yahoo etc. Lest we fall into a vortex where you're only allowed to browse the public web by logging in through Facebook The other argument that this may hold water is similar exceptions wh…
Of course I understand that the publishers don't want to cut themselves out of the conversation.
But why must "the conversation" be limited to powerful internet companies? Do we not converse about news articles in blog posts? Comment threads? Up and coming social platforms that don't have Facebooks media clout yet?
It's simply unfair to treat a visitor arriving at your site from Google differently to a visitor arriving at your site from anywhere else. It runs against the grain of the web. To that end, if I hadn't published this extension, someone else would have made it. If Google removes "Referer" privileges from Chrome extensions, someone will fork Chromium to allow them again. Let's build a better — a more fair — paywall.
Disappointed in you Jeremy. Its fair for many here to complain about some of the online advertising practices of publishers. However the viable alternative it to pivot to some form of subscription model. Its a hard transition and many orgs are making risky changes to do better. Extensions like these are a step backwards. If you value the work you should support it. See bio for usual disclaimers
I see you wrote a Chrome extension that cuts most of the ads from NYT.
If so I'd love to add that I'm annoyed by some of the tactics and lengths that publishers go to to monetize content ad the expense of user-experience and other costs.
The only path right now are ads, 'sponsored content', 'native units'.
I would much rather we have a subscription-based model that generated enough revenue to ween them off awful ad experiences.
Thats very much an aspirational goal.
My larger point is that having readers circumvent that, as opposed to supporting that, is disheartening to many of us who are working on the inside to push change.
BTW: And that extension was a redesign, of which ads were removed or moved. The NYT legal dept had Google remove it.
I need a 'facebook sent me' version, lots of websites allow facebook references but not neccesarily google. I'm reduced to going to facebook and sending a message to myself with the url so I can click on it.
> lots of websites allow facebook references but not neccesarily google