Re:Moving the Washington Post to HTTPS
by eli on Friday December 11, 2015 @03:33PM
(#10719771)
I haven't specifically tried that exact approach, but I have a fair bit of experience with ad-supported news sites.
> I feel like a lot of people don't pay for news ... That doesn't mean they're not good potential widget customers.
I'm having a hard time thinking of any advertiser who would be happy about excluding the sort of dedicated reader who is willing to pay for content online. I'm not saying the remaining ad impressions are "bad" just that they are objectively less valuable. That's why this scheme disproportionately devalues ad impressions: you remove the direct impressions from people who buy a pass and you also make the remaining impressions less valuable.
> I feel like a lot of people don't pay for news ... That doesn't mean they're not good potential widget customers.
I'm having a hard time thinking of any advertiser who would be happy about excluding the sort of dedicated reader who is willing to pay for content online. I'm not saying the remaining ad impressions are "bad" just that they are objectively less valuable. That's why this scheme disproportionately devalues ad impressions: you remove the direct impressions from people who buy a pass and you also make the remaining impressions less valuable.
Look at how washingtonpost.com positions itself to advertisers: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-adv/mediacenter/html/ad_was... and then imagine how much harder it would be to buy into that story if it excluded many wealthy and loyal readers.