
Up against the paywall - prostoalex
http://www.economist.com/news/business/21678799-many-publishers-still-see-little-alternative-continual-cutbacks-up-against-paywall
======
fauigerzigerk
They're not making it easy for those who are willing to pay for journalism. I
used to be a subscriber to The Economist. They kept showing me unstoppable
video adverts right in the middle an article.

I told them if they didn't stop doing that I would cancel my subscription.
There was no response to my complaint. I cancelled. They didn't even ask why
(and that's in the age of incessant customer satisfaction surveys).

The Wall St. Journal, another paper that I might be willing to pay for, makes
it so difficult to unsubscribe that I hesitate to even get the promotional
short term subscription. Also, they have a reputation for overcharging in the
most egregious ways.

The Financial Times is extremely expensive especially if you need offline
(ePaper) access.

So here you have someone who is willing to spend hundereds of pounds per year
for news and isn't spending a single penny right now (other than for the
mandatory BBC license fee)

------
jacquesm
Is this some kind of subtle self-referential joke? I can't read the article
without subscribing...

In case you hit the same issue:

[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vua-
bfQ...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vua-
bfQgHkAJ:http://www.economist.com/news/business/21678799-many-publishers-
still-see-little-alternative-continual-cutbacks-up-against-
paywall%2BUp+against+the+paywall&gws_rd=cr&hl=en&&ct=clnk)

~~~
kdamken
That's odd - I was able to click the link, go to the article, and simply click
the X in the upper right hand corner of the pop up that first appeared and was
able to view it.

~~~
jacquesm
It seems stuck in something reading 'mandatory cookie consent'. But through
the google cache I get the page and then it is just another small step to
remove the overlay.

~~~
smackfu
A lot of sites use some kind of geo IP lookup to only show the Euro cookie
prompt to European users, which is probably what you were running into, and
why it didn't show to other people.

------
thetmkay
Downvote me/report me if this is against etiquette, but I'm working on a
project around this very problem: supporting the government-independent press
and reclaiming consumer power (by not using an ad-subsidised business model).

I cannot pass up this perfect opportunity to ask people who care about/consume
news:

Information is a commodity (especially in english-speaking countries), yet
independent news & information is critical to society. Would you be willing to
donate (not pay) for news? Or what future for independent news/information
sources do you hope/expect?

~~~
toomuchtodo
> Would you be willing to donate (not pay) for news?

Yes, but I believe people like myself are an outlier. I gave a substantial sum
(<$1000) to Muckrock for their private prison investigation when it looked
like their crowdfunding campaign might not fully fund.

People will want to contribute to causes they're passionate about. Can you
find enough people who are passionate about independent, unbiased journalism?

------
Nickersf
Am I the only one alarmed that buzzfeed is being considered a reputable news
source? The content teeters between tabloid and comedy.

~~~
zem
they do the fluffy content to support the reputable content. having that as an
explicit business model has actually helped them structure and retain the
dividing line very nicely, as opposed to newspapers who have tried to make
their content more and more clickbaity in order to vie for readers' attention,
but have not formulated an explicit two-bin policy for themselves.

------
csomar
Few things (strictly my opinion):

1\. Old advertising offered really a little in term of tracking, conversion
and analysis. Advertisers had to spend without having much knowledge of what's
going on.

2\. New advertising probably optimized spending. New mediums (Google,
Facebook, etc...) are now taking your attention (time) and thus not only the
TV/Newspaper is.

3\. People are used to the free lunch in the digital screen. They are very
likely to buy the paper then to subscribe.

4\. Newspapers moved online. But they messed it up. Instead of figuring out
how to properly monetize, they become aggressive. They spam you with infinite
amounts of ads.

------
danmaz74
> Axel Springer’s boss, Matthias Döpfner, said recently that on the website of
> Bild, the group’s biggest title, the proportion of readers using ad-blockers
> fell from around a quarter to less than one in ten when it started forcing
> them to choose between viewing ads or paying for the articles.

Interesting data point.

~~~
imglorp
And how much did overall traffic rise or fall as a result?

That is, how many visitors, forced to unblock but having other alternative
sites, will go elsewhere?

~~~
mikro2nd
And, perhaps more interesting, what was the effect on revenues? Did the ad
exposures pay as much, more, or less than paying visitors, I wonder?

------
the-dude
Blendle ( [https://blendle.com](https://blendle.com) ) is actually mentioned,
wow. What a lame argument to dismiss it. It is quite popular here in NL.

edit: read the article.

