Live data from Hacker News

Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

theregister.co.uk

11–20 of 121 posts

Re: Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

#11
post #8
post #3

When I see a nice Headline on HN: "Oh cool, I would love to read that", then I look at the domain: "Oh it's on medium. Never mind then." I'd never pay for that shit show.

It's a blogging platform. Why posts hosted there should be any less interesting than posts hosted on any other platform?

While I don't feel as strongly about Medium as the parent comment, I'm also less inclined to read an article when it is posted on Medium. No real reason, really, just a personal bias from myself because I'm finding a lot of "thought-leader-pieces" articles over there, and technical content over there are not as well formatted as the ones on someone's personal blog that are well designed for code snippets and such in the article.

I still read Medium articles when I came across articles written by people whose work I'm somewhat familiar with though.

Re: Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

#12

I would pay a few bucks to have my articles proof read and for stylistic enhancements. How much this producer centric model would yield is another question...

That's an interesting angle, charge the creators instead of the consumers. I'm writing from time to time on Medium myself, and could have paid for that as well.

I've also sometimes paid for images for my articles. If Medium made is super easy (and cheap) to find and buy images for an article, I'd use it.

Have no idea if these revenue streams could scale to the degree Medium needs, though.

Re: Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

#13
This article is a pretty good take-down of Medium's business model and its future prospects.

But even if you don't really care about Medium, it's actually a very strong piece otherwise, because it presents a fairly comprehensive list of the various business models that online publishers have tried over the years, along with data about how successful those strategies have been.

I'm a former journalist who had to leave the industry not because I didn't care for journalism anymore, but because newspapers lost their business model, and the industry remains a shadow of its former self.

Among the business models the article describes:

- Ad-funded. When it doesn't work well: General interest news orgs, such as your daily metro newspaper. The bulk of their ad revenue continues to come from print advertising, and digital advertising has little chance of every pulling in comparable revenue. When it works well: "We cover a specific niche; we dig in a little deeper; we tend to know what we're talking about; we're independently owned and thus have no corporate investors to please."

- Subscription. When it doesn't work well: Historically, people have been reluctant to pay for what they thought they could get for free. When it does work well: "Big respected names with huge resources that have hit on a specific model: offer a few free articles a month and then prompt for subscription. It has finally started working after a decade of hard times. In part thanks to the election of Donald Trump, these news organizations have seen their subscriber levels jump. ... it seems that, psychologically, people are getting used to the idea again of paying for content. It's like a switch. And once you pay for Netflix, Spotify and Amazon Prime, it seems perfectly reasonable to pay for quality news."

- Guilt. When it doesn't work well: The Guardian has tried a variation of this -- "If you use it, if you like it, then why not pay for it? It's only fair." -- and the results have been terrible. When it does work well: Wikipedia's donation drives tend to pull in a ton of cash, but it's a nonprofit.

- Advertorials. When it doesn't work well: In Business Insider's case, "you literally sell yourself to companies. We predict this will end in misery sooner rather than later." When it does work well: Hmm, I don't think it ever does.

And then there are the various compensation models for the content producers:

- Pay professional journalists a decent salary, and don't hinge their pay on page views. It's the most expensive option, but you get what you pay for: Quality, in-depth journalism.

- Pay professional journalists (or unprofessional bloggers) according to their number of page views. This tends to lead to "junk journalism that a hit-based reward model encourages."

- Don't pay your bloggers at all. It's the least expensive option, but again, you get what you pay for.

Re: Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

#14
I'm happy to pay for things that provide value in my life.

I pay a modest amount to some bloggers directly via Patreon for what I could otherwise get for free. I'm also considering doing the same for The Guardian (though that gets me the removal of ads). It's not out of the question that I would want to do the same for Medium.

I would miss them if they went away or had to change direction to monetise in new ways that reduced their value to me. Is this so bad?

Re: Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

#15
post #9

The problem is that they are trying to fix something which dont need fixing. Media is not broken, its exactly as good as it can be when so many people have access to writing whatever they want. The search for a large scale business model in media is never going to turn anything out, its not the content thats valuable but distribution.

This. Medium and most other sites-in-search-of-a-business-model (including the Register) think that content is king, and that by producing 'better' content will create more revenue. In fact, distribution is king, and getting more distribution -- independent of the content -- is the key to success. Consider a site with high distribution and crap content: It's already making money and can always improve the content. A site with no distribution can't make money even if it improves its content.

Re: Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

#16
post #13

This article is a pretty good take-down of Medium's business model and its future prospects. But even if you don't really care about Medium, it's actually a very strong piece otherwise, because it presents a fairly comprehensive list of the various business models that online publishers have tried over the years, along with data about how successful those strategies have been. I'm a former journalist who had to leave…

I agree. It is a well-written article that shows the larger issue with media as a whole I believe. Social media and mass media companies are all funded by either advertising or subscriptions. As information has become ubiquitous and repetitive, it's value has gone down.

It's a vicious cycle that is coupled with many people not having money to spend on 'premium news' when there is a global existential crisis and extinction event underway.

I can read an entire Business Insider article without turning off AdBlocker. Why should I pay for their broken 'business model'? Their content is not worth paying for because it is usually derivative and their entire strategy is based on clickbait.

How do you think media will evolve over the next few years?

Re: Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

#17
post #7
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats a bit hyperbolic. There are some good articles on Medium. And its just "some".

There are some good articles, but they exist in a sea of noise. I don't know about you, but I come to places like HN because that noise is undesirable.

I'm here for the same exact reason. I wonder why Medium attracts that kind of content? Why are people into reading and sharing that kind of stuff? I wonder how much of media metrics are real and meaningful vs. how much of it is forgotten a day later and meaningless after that?

Re: Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

#18
post #13

This article is a pretty good take-down of Medium's business model and its future prospects. But even if you don't really care about Medium, it's actually a very strong piece otherwise, because it presents a fairly comprehensive list of the various business models that online publishers have tried over the years, along with data about how successful those strategies have been. I'm a former journalist who had to leave…

- Advertorials. When it does work well: The Onion?

https://contently.com/strategist/2016/05/23/dont-make-a-comm...

Re: Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

#19
post #3

When I see a nice Headline on HN: "Oh cool, I would love to read that", then I look at the domain: "Oh it's on medium. Never mind then." I'd never pay for that shit show.

Facts: Hacker News gets a ton of articles posted from Medium, but very few of them get to the front page. Last time I measured there had been 4,108 posts from medium.com in 2017 (largest source of news for HN), but less than 3% of them got some upvote traction.

So you seem to be sharing a similar sentiment towards Medium than the rest of the HN readers.

(Even posting tweets to HN gets them double the attention than a random Medium post)

https://medium.com/@hoffa/hacker-news-on-bigquery-now-with-d...

Re: Medium asks $5 a month for nothing

#20
post #10
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a blogging platform. Why posts hosted there should be any less interesting than posts hosted on any other platform?

For some odd reason medium attracts the worst content. All those super optimistic shallow nonsense. Urgh.

Why do you think that is? Is it something about our times, people in general, or having nothing better to say?
Post reply on HN