Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 19th Sep 2015 14:37 UTC
Internet & Networking

Let's talk ad-blocking.

With the arrival of iOS 9, ad-blocking is coming to mobile in a big way, and it's causing a lot of talk all over the web. It is highlighting the internal struggle some feel about the practice, but also the hypocrisy of some of its staunchest proponents. So far, it seems like the real 'bloodbath' isn't taking place where people thought it would be - namely, publishers - but among personalities.

Thread beginning with comment 618039
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: The elephant in the room
by kwan_e on Sun 20th Sep 2015 08:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: The elephant in the room"
kwan_e
Member since:
2007-02-18

Let me rephrase it. The point I was trying to make is that it's not sites like OSNews that will go under, it's sites like The Verge with paid staff that have to worry.


The Verge can let go of staff and reduce its size and their revenue would still probably cover their operational costs.

I don't know anything about the finances of OSNews, but given that none of the contributors are paid and one works "overtime" to keep the front page going just so it can get some traffic probably means it can't handle revenue reduction that sites like Verge can.

Anyway, back to your original postulate that my web experience won't exist if I don't accept ads, that is just not true.


Only if we accept your assumption that big sites will be hit the hardest, which seems nothing more than wishful thinking. Maybe if there was no such thing as fixed costs vs variable costs in economics then maybe. But they exist.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Wondercool Member since:
2005-07-08

Afaik, OSNews doesn't pay contributors unlike Engadget. Costs are greatly reduced compared to commercial sites, it doesn't matter if they are fixed or not.

I am not saying it will be easy. More difficult are services like Google maps, Slashdot or Reddit.

The whole world uses Google maps, yet it is free (up to a point). If Google doesn't make money, probably we don't have maps (but even here we have volunteer sites like openstreetmap)

Slashdot was sold to a company and they are really struggling to make money of it and now it is for sale again. There was (is?) a plan to 'buy' the site by the readers and to preserve its spirit and continue from there but it has yet to materialise. I would pay money for such a plan btw.

Reddit is losing a lot of (investor) money even though most of the site is volunteer work, and still hasn't found a way to make money.
I still don't think ads are the way to go for those sites. I would ask 1 buck per year for those sites rather than diluting the site with ads. A bit like Whatsapp.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I sort of agree about the small payment, but I also don't want lots of content to go behind a paywall.

It's much better if everything can be indexed by search engine robots and easily found and universally accessible.

Maybe what we need is more like a kickstarted approach.

You want to write an article ? (or have already written one) If enough people pay for it (you might get early access), after a threshold is reached it gets published.

Reply Parent Score: 3