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

How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 390 posts

Re: How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

#331

Post by rpgmaker »

dexterdog wrote: post #246
ljoshua wrote: post #238

As has been mentioned elsewhere, my exact problem with this/Forbes approach/elsewhere is that there is no way that I want to suddenly start managing several new monthly subscriptions for all these outlets. I enjoy Wired, but the thought of adding yet another subscription to my monthly credit card statement is too great a cognitive load for me to want to make the jump. Also, if you were to subscribe to the dead tree v…

Why wouldn't you make it invisible? Do people really want to decide to pay or not pay for each page hit? You have a monthly fund which is your subscription. When you hit a site that is in the network it gets a chit against your account. At the end of the month (or whatever) your chits are counted up and providers get credited. It's really pretty simple and invisible. People get to fund what they actually use. Content…

For a site like Wired and many other established publishers this doesn't make any financial sense. There's still a lot of money to be made from plain old ads, as annoying as they may be to most of us. It's obvious by now that one way or the other ads are going the way of the dodo but it's difficult to think what will replace them or if that replacement will leave us better off. The way I see it, in the not so distant future all these publishers will be paywalled and we may have to resort to 'article pirates' in order to read them because I'm not about to pay 60 different $4/month subscriptions for the eventual article posted on one of the aggregation platforms I frequent. I really don't browse most of these sites, which is what would justify the $4/month, in theory anyways.

Re: How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

#332

Post by chinathrow »

vanderZwan wrote: post #247
ljoshua wrote: post #238

As has been mentioned elsewhere, my exact problem with this/Forbes approach/elsewhere is that there is no way that I want to suddenly start managing several new monthly subscriptions for all these outlets. I enjoy Wired, but the thought of adding yet another subscription to my monthly credit card statement is too great a cognitive load for me to want to make the jump. Also, if you were to subscribe to the dead tree v…

In the Netherlands and Germany, there's Blendle, and it's very successful. http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Blendle https://medium.com/on-blendle

Why is it very successfully? Have you got any revenue figures to share?

Content partnerships alone doesn't make it successful.

Re: How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

#333

Post by soared »

Falkon1313 wrote: post #181
iSnow wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could someone enlighten me why a lot of sites don't only pull in google analytics, but also a handful of other analytics sites like scorecaredresearch or chartbeat?

Sure. Every analytics company tries to differentiate themselves by claiming that they do something the others don't and showing off some pretty charts. The marketers buy the hype and want all of that. "If I take this pretty chart from here, and that table that from there, and these numbers from over here, I can make a really impressive report!" And they want to make sure that they're collecting all the data they coul…

It sounds like the points you're making are all negative, but it also sounds like a fairly valid argument to me. Sure marketers add too much js with the allure of big data, but whats the cost? 0.1% of users (hn readers and the like) are annoyed by it? I'd gladly piss off a tiny fraction of my users to better understand the other 99.9%.

Re: How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

#334

Post by bitmapbrother »

isomorphic wrote: post #4

> So, in the coming weeks, we will restrict access to articles on WIRED.com if you are using an ad blocker. Good luck with that, Wired. The people-who-will-never-pay group will split into two: People who never visit your site again, and people who up the ante in the ad-blocking escalation. While you may think that you don't care about the people-who-will-never-pay group, the latter subgroup will release their improve…

Why would Wired care about people that use ad blockers and never visit their site again? They're really no value to Wired so why expend resources on them? I have no problem adding Wired.com to my whitelist because I enjoy their articles.

>I don't see this ending well for any party involved.

I would get used to this. Ad blockers are relatively easy to defeat and if that 20% figure starts getting higher we'll start to see more and more sites employ these countermeasures.

Re: How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

#335

Post by drzaiusapelord »

ljoshua wrote: post #238

As has been mentioned elsewhere, my exact problem with this/Forbes approach/elsewhere is that there is no way that I want to suddenly start managing several new monthly subscriptions for all these outlets. I enjoy Wired, but the thought of adding yet another subscription to my monthly credit card statement is too great a cognitive load for me to want to make the jump. Also, if you were to subscribe to the dead tree v…

Did you read the same article as me? They are only charging if you block ads. If you whitelist them on your ad blocker, you'll see the content. Its clear they know no one will pay, but need to address the neckbeardy complaints that will come their way about 'being forced to see ads,' 'being forced to be tracked,' etc.

>Suggested Solution:

I see nothing wrong with the solution as is: view ads or pay to block. It seems like the rational middle ground here. Oh and they're committed to 'polite' ads. I don't think I've ever seen a loud ad on their site, ever. So this is a pretty easy commitment for them. I do hope that all this drama is making web publishers reconsider how loud and obnoxious most advertising is on the web, especially the mobile web.

My big fear is that publishing will move into free hosting, namely on Facebook and other walled gardens. I think there are some pretty evil unintended consequences of ubiquitous ad blocking that no one is really considering yet.

Re: How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

#336

Post by gedrap »

dexterdog wrote: post #311
gedrap wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd assume it's to keep things easier, especially for a young company. It should be much easier to deal with publishers when you can agree on cost per view, rather than trying to work out some magic subscriptions share model, like the one used by spotify, which is pretty hard to do and keep everyone happy. But that's just an educated guess :)

I agree, but that variable cost is what makes it variable to the consumer which is generally not accepted. Putting a hurdle before a click to view an article generally destroys your readership.

It's totally true for things like spotify, where you can easily stream thousands of songs just in the background every month. Imagine how silly it would be if you had to make sure that spotify is closed when you leave your computer on for some time :)

However, consuming written content is different. It's much more involved, conscious action. So I am not sure if it is really much worse for the user.

Re: How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

#337

Post by brightball »

ljoshua wrote: post #238

As has been mentioned elsewhere, my exact problem with this/Forbes approach/elsewhere is that there is no way that I want to suddenly start managing several new monthly subscriptions for all these outlets. I enjoy Wired, but the thought of adding yet another subscription to my monthly credit card statement is too great a cognitive load for me to want to make the jump. Also, if you were to subscribe to the dead tree v…

Couldn't you just disable ad-block on that site so they get paid without it coming out of your wallet?

Re: How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

#338

Post by pc86 »

> we do all we can to write vital stories for an audience that’s passionate about the ongoing adventure of our rapidly changing world

Can't even finish the first paragraph before the bullshit starts flowing.

Re: How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

#339

Post by dhimes »

elorant wrote: post #293
mikro2nd wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd buy into your idea with one addition: A "Refund" button at the bottom of the article that I can click to get my money back if the content ended up being low quality. That's a "No questions asked, no arguments given" refund, and it is my sole judgement as to what constitutes crappy quality. That might buy the publisher (a) some credibility, and (b) an incentive to publish decent quality articles and not clickbait…

The refund option isn't fair for the publisher. When you visit a restaurant do you get a refund if you don't like the food? Or a theater? I don't need a refund, if I pay for a few articles and they prove to be crap I won't visit the medium again. Besides we're talking about cents here, it's not like you bought a Picasso only to realize after a couple of months that you don't really like it.

Maybe if it was implemented in a different way, like a running tally for a month for which you are billed. You read an article, then decide whether or not you are willing to pay for that article. At the end of the month you get a bill for the amount that you agreed to. Kind of like the 'pay what you will' but with a set asking fee per article.
Post reply on HN