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

Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

elezea.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 126 posts

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#51

Post by nicksergeant »

Why don't we start by trying to raise the quality and therefore effectiveness of ads on the Internet? A fundamental shift in how ads work and what they're trying to do needs to be done.

The ads you see on websites right now are remnants from the newspaper, nearly identical to their print counterparts.

Creating a "prettier ad network" or "other way to be profitable" is only patchwork. We need to completely rework the execution of "I have something to sell and I'd like to tell your readers / customers about it".

Solving this requires something larger.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#53

Post by randallsquared »

edw519 wrote: post #41

edw519's simple rules for reading on the internet: That's a Back Button (to the cadence of "That's a Paddlin'" from "The Simpsons") http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFgR0m-9FmM Login button below the fold? That's a back button. Animated ads? That's a back button. Shifting content? That's a back button. More than 2 pages? That's a back button. Need to be logged in to Facebook. That's a back button. Unexpected video? Tha…

    No horizontal scroll bar at 800 x 600? That's a back button.
Did you mean "Horizontal scroll bar at 800 x 600? That's a back button?"

I'm not sure how content fitting nicely in 800px is a drawback.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#54

Post by edw519 »

randallsquared wrote: post #53
edw519 wrote: post #41

edw519's simple rules for reading on the internet: That's a Back Button (to the cadence of "That's a Paddlin'" from "The Simpsons") http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFgR0m-9FmM Login button below the fold? That's a back button. Animated ads? That's a back button. Shifting content? That's a back button. More than 2 pages? That's a back button. Need to be logged in to Facebook. That's a back button. Unexpected video? Tha…

No horizontal scroll bar at 800 x 600? That's a back button. Did you mean "Horizontal scroll bar at 800 x 600? That's a back button?" I'm not sure how content fitting nicely in 800px is a drawback.

Changed from

"No horizontal scroll bar at 800 x 600?"

to

"No horizontal scroll bar to get beyond right fold?"

Do people even realize that some of their content becomes unavailable on certain browsers and at certain resolutions.

Thanks.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#55

Post by rbarooah »

scriptproof wrote: post #31

There was a statement of Matt Cutts at PubCon saying Google will penalyze pages with too much ads above the fold. Expect to see that.

I can see this becoming the subject of antitrust action.

Penalizing other people for advertising rather than relevance when they themselves make their money through advertising is going to be a problem.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#56

Post by einhverfr »

edw519 wrote: post #41

edw519's simple rules for reading on the internet: That's a Back Button (to the cadence of "That's a Paddlin'" from "The Simpsons") http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFgR0m-9FmM Login button below the fold? That's a back button. Animated ads? That's a back button. Shifting content? That's a back button. More than 2 pages? That's a back button. Need to be logged in to Facebook. That's a back button. Unexpected video? Tha…

Certainly by those standards, the Youtube link you supplied is a back button. I wonder if you do find anything readable outside of HN these days ;-)

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#57

Post by jvdh »

I don't think that Daring Fireball is a good example for a membership based blog. Gruber made all feeds freely available in August 2007. The membership button is still there, but besides a T-shirt, it doesn't provide you with anything new.

AFAIK he gets a lot more from the weekly feed-sponsorships, The Deck ads, and Amazon referrals.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#59

Post by spooneybarger »

artmageddon wrote: post #45
prawn wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay for a newspaper and it still has advertising...

Yes, but the advertisements don't get in the way of the content - editors wouldn't allow that. Also, the only way the ads can harm you is if they're coated with cocaine or some other drug :)

I suggest you pick up a copy of the New York Post and other NYC 'tabloid' style papers before making a blanket statement like "editors wouldn't allow that."

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#60

Post by qjz »

EwanToo wrote: post #37
michaelfeathers wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fallacy there is that there is nothing to prevent ads from creeping in even though you do pay. That's been the history of cinema, cable, and internet radio.

Absolutely right, but at the same time if you do pay, you have some (perhaps small) leverage over the content provider to try and ensure the advertising remains of a tolerable quality.

In practice, it seems that advertiser dollars always trump subscriber fees.
Post reply on HN