17 ms·

“This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

302 points by esolyt 11y ago

JohnTHaller 11y ago
Wired will be losing ad revenue due to Apple adding ad blocking abilities to mobile Safari. So, Wired moves content to Apple News which has ads that can't be blocked (and Apple conveniently takes a nice juicy cut of).
- fezz 11y ago
  This should almost be the title of the thread.
  - stock_toaster 11y ago
    I can see it now. "Ad network makes money selling ads". Probably wouldn't have been upvoted as much though.
- stevesearer 11y ago
  I'm pretty sure they only take a cut of ads sold through their iAd system and take 0% cut for ads sold directly by the publication.
  - cmelbye 11y ago
    I'm glad someone pointed this fact out. Source: https://developer.apple.com/news-publisher/ https://developer.apple.com/news-publisher/
  - JohnTHaller 11y ago
    Yes and no. This is basically a little bit disingenuous. Today, most publications will use something like DoubleClick to manage their ads, sell a bunch directly to specific companies, setup bidding on some others via another provider hooked into the same system, and then use Google AdSense for the remnant inventory. From my reading of it, on Apple News, you're required to use iAd to manage the inventory. iAd allows you to do direct sales through it's own system. And then all the rest are remnant and handled through iAd. Apple locks out all other players from that large part of the ad market, including Google. Knowing Apple... especially Google. It's a brilliant two-pronged strategy to lock content providers and consumers into the Apple ecosystem.
    - daenney 11y ago
      That does not appear to be true: > Earn 100% of the revenue from ads you sell, and 70% when iAd sells ads for you. https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documentation/General/Conceptual/News_Publishing_Guide/MonetizingonNews.html https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documenta...
      - deong 11y ago
        That doesn't contradict his post saying "iAd allows you to do direct sales through it's own system".
        daenney 11y ago
        It contradicts his implication that Apple will force you to use iAd, at least the way I'm interpreting it.
        deong 11y ago
        This (https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documentation/General/Conceptual/News_Publishing_Guide/FAQ.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40015407-CH15-SW1 https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documenta...) seems clearer to me. Quoting: How can I monetize my content? You can monetize your Apple News Format content with iAd, Apple’s advertising platform. Whether you sell your own ads or have iAd sell on your behalf, you’ll earn revenue from every impression in your articles and channels.
    - exelius 11y ago
      The setup you describe is only true of very small publishers (i.e. a single site). iAd is essentially a supply-side platform (SSP); just like DoubleClick. A large publisher like Wired will use what's called a demand-side platform (DSP) -- something like Auditude or Freewheel. This would allow you to manage ad sales between 3rd party ad networks, data partners, internal sales and remnant inventory in a way that provides the publisher with control over what ads get shown. A common setup is to bid an impression against multiple ad networks (and local inventory) based on the user's data profile (obtained from a data provider). Google consolidates all of this themselves, which makes it easier if you're small, but any major publisher is going to handle ad sales at least partially in house. Ad sales are the revenue stream, and you just don't outsource your revenue generation process -- period. There's just a conflict of interest in doing it any other way. A DSP wants to play multiple SSPs against each other to get the highest priced ads for its content while preserving the user experience (DSPs often include features that allow you restrict the number of times an ad shows to the same user, etc). The SSPs are looking to get the best results for their advertisers at the lowest price. It's not a brilliant move because platform lock-in is too easy to avoid thanks to the myriad of ad tech providers in the space. Apple will get some app developers and small sites with this, but 95% of the market has evolved past a solution like this into something far more "enterprise".
- andrewstuart2 11y ago
  They'd better be getting an extra cut for the exclusivity period, though. Otherwise that part would be pointless. They could just serve this page for only IOS9 devices based on user agent.
- btown 11y ago
  It's almost certain that Apple's long game is to make this the norm. If there's one surefire way to get people addicted to ad blockers, it's to make them available on mobile devices. Once enough content creators start moving content behind News-walls, then Apple can roll out desktop versions of News. And as people then start asking each other "how do I get ad blocking in my browser as well," Apple's well positioned to be the only unblockable advertising platform, period. They could even use iTunes as a vector to deliver an Apple News desktop app to Windows machines. It's brilliant and will completely change the balance of power in online advertising. Google will not be happy...
  - lantern-manner 11y ago
    I don't think you're taking into account that websites are free to create their own apps, and advertise there. There's little incentive for a content creator to have their content off the net, and into someone else's apps. Im not understanding Wired's motivation here, but I'm not too concerned because Wired isn't the most intelligent publication in the first place.
    - Kankuro 11y ago
      "websites are free to create their own apps" The users may accept to install a few apps (Apple/Google/… News), but not one for each website.
    - qubex 11y ago
      I pine for the WIRED of yesteryear. The current publication is but a pallid, embarrassing shadow of a formerly brilliant publication. It's now on a par with VICE, GQ or some such, and quite frankly, it is heartbreaking. The guiding light of my youth essentially extinguished (particularly as I grew up in nineties Italy, from where it provided a fascinating and prescient window into the social aspects of tech). </rant>
  - josteink 11y ago
    You assume everyone and their grandmother has Apple-equipment. Most of the world doesn't. Saying that you will only do business with those who has Apple-equipment is leaving out most of the market, and doing so would be suicide for most businesses.
- jad 11y ago
  I think there's almost no chance that the percentage of iOS users blocking ads is enough to meaningfully impact Wired's overall revenue from that story. Even given that ad blocking apps have been top sellers, it's still only available on iOS 9, which has been out less than a week. So surely revenue from all web users (without an ad blocker) outweigh the (presumably) tiny amount of ad revenue Wired will earn from Apple News. And even if all that were false, why would Wired alone give in so readily to what's basically bullying? It's just not a credible theory. Way more likely is that Apple is paying them a nice chunk of cash for the exclusivity to help market their News app. Same thing they did with HBO Now for the Apple TV, and with various albums for the iTunes Store and Apple Music.
  - deong 11y ago
    My understanding of Apple News is that it has nothing to do with iOS 9 content blocking. Apple News is a dedicated app that functions somewhat like an RSS reader serving up a special Readability-style version of the content. Even if you don't install an ad-blocker in iOS 9, you still don't see banner ads and such in Apple News. That said, I imagine you're right and Apple just paid for the exclusive for marketing purposes.
    - qubex 11y ago
      The point that is being made is that by cutting off a fraction of mobile ad revenue by allowing blockers, Apple might be seen to be cynically herding content providers towards its walled-garden platform wherein iAd is the exclusive provider of adverts, which cannot be blocked. Whether this is the true intention of their strategy or merely a coincidence is a matter of some (understandably contentious) debate.
  - simonh 11y ago
    > Even given that ad blocking apps have been top sellers, it's still only available on iOS 9, which has been out less than a week. iOS9 penetration is already past 50%(1). New versions usually get mass adoption very quickly. (1) http://www.macrumors.com/2015/09/21/apple-ios-9-50-percent/ http://www.macrumors.com/2015/09/21/apple-ios-9-50-percent/
- smpetrey 11y ago
  It should be noted, (although I may be alone here on this) I'm not seeing any ads on the Apple News story. My guess, is the story is to gauge traffic and _ad potential_.
lerxst 11y ago
I imagine their bounce rate will be very high if they continue doing this. Other news sites have done similar things such as make you participate in a survey before reading the article. In order for me to open this article before September 22, I would have to copy that link, paste it into an email to myself, open Mail on my phone, and open the link from my own email.
- chillacy 11y ago
  I guess the real question will be if the reduced pageviews offset the increased ad impressions. As much as I also hate those popups (I often leave the page), I imagine they've done enough split testing to know that it at least helps their bottom line in the short term.
  - hudell 11y ago
    Well, I've seen a bigger website change their layout completely believing it would increase ad impressions, assuming that users scrolled down on their page. It went live, their profit was reduced to less than half, thousands of people lost their job. The new layout stayed.
- burntwater 11y ago
  Quora permanently lost me several years ago when they suddenly forced me to select five categories of interest before I could continue to the question I was interested in. Forcing me to do something I have no interest in and will never make use of is a good way to alienate me.
  - bandicity 11y ago
    Quora requires registration to simply read it. That's at least going to lose them viewers who don't want to bother.
    - aclissold 11y ago
      Or multiple incognito/private windows :P
nathancahill 11y ago
Mods, please DON'T change this title. The post would become completely non-sensical.
- dang 11y ago
  The title you're reading is what we changed it to. The submitted title was "This story is exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday". We changed it to an exact quote from the article and put it in quotation marks. p.s. Please don't use uppercase for emphasis: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
  - kuschku 11y ago
    How do we make text bold for emphasis? or should we just use UTF characters for that?
    - alayne 11y ago
      Please just write normally formatted sentences.
      - kuschku 11y ago
        As I answered to several other comments, this is not a helpful suggestion when most typographers suggest to use bold for emphasis of sans-serif fonts, as italic with sans-serif is less noticeable than 𝗯𝗼𝗹𝗱.
        deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
        kuschku 11y ago
        But I want to have the typesetting ability to provide emphasis, distinction, quotes, like in a book. If I can’t get TeX or markdown, at least proper emphasis should be supported.
Navarr 11y ago
Odds Apple is paying them? Very high, right?
- cpmsmith 11y ago
  100% odds.
lfam 11y ago
Apple is implementing a content paywall at the device level.
- narrator 11y ago
  Theory: Apple wants to defeat Google by eliminating ads and making the purchase of the device the amortized payment for content. Analysis: The problem with this strategy is that Apple is going to have to scale to all the content in the world, in foreign languages, on obscure or controversial topics on a million blogs. Super niche content will fade, starved of app revenue and have to rely on native IOS ad with unblockable ads for distribution.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - jameshart 11y ago
    Apple has done a pretty good job of building and supporting a long tail of apps. They're working on it with music. Why can't they take that model to content?
    - narrator 11y ago
      Prediction: Apple Blogs. It's like the app store, but for blogs. You need a mac to create content for it. Free and premium blogs, In blog purchase, etc.
    - meeper16 11y ago
      This is because Apple knows very little about algorithmic internet-wide Search or much of anything on the algorithmic level when compared to Google. Think about the maps debacle, its horrible email search, its purchase of Chomp to help it figure out app search. Apple builds the nice looking robots, Google builds the brains.
    - sangnoir 11y ago
      > Apple has done a pretty good job of building and supporting a long tail of app I think "adequate" is a better description of Apples efforts. Discoverability is still awful on the App Store, after many years.
torrance 11y ago
Apple News isn't available in a lot of countries for whatever reason. So this not only means its inaccessible to non-iOS9 devices, but it's also inaccessible to, eg., all of New Zealand.
- noob_learning 11y ago
  I'm in NZ, you can change your region to US to get the new Apple News
  - exodust 11y ago
    Worth trying only for short term curiosity. Beyond that it's a clumsy workaround with consequences for other apps and services that depend on the region being true.
    - joosters 11y ago
      Not sure why people are downvoting the comment though, it's a valid workaround if you needed to temporarily access something.
- derefr 11y ago
  I'm guessing it's just a paucity of news agencies in the given country that have set up a feed in Apple News format; Apple doesn't want to flip the switch for a country until they have a good default selection of that country's local feeds to let people pick from. I noticed that on the iOS9 beta, with my region set to Canada, the News app was unavailable, but on the springboard search view, the embedded news items were from (two) Canadian sources. So it seems like they're working on it.
- kozukumi 11y ago
  Indeed, this just confused me for a minute. I am in the UK and Apple News isn't available here yet.
- AriinPHD 11y ago
  This explains a lot ... I thought something was broken.
staunch 11y ago
Torrents of popular newspaper and magazine articles may become popular soon.
- icebraining 11y ago
  They already are - PDFs of the Economist appear every week on torrent sites.
  - staunch 11y ago
    Like, much more popular though.
alayne 11y ago
I'm an Apple user, but I have no interest in Apple curated news via a dedicated app. I can't believe there's a significant market there.
- pat2man 11y ago
  A lot of people still go to say yahoo.com for their news. The default is good enough for them.
- Reedx 11y ago
  But it's a default auto-installed app (on iOS9) and the headlines are on the search / Siri Suggestions screen. I'd be surprised if it doesn't already have a huge market...
  - beedogs 11y ago
    It doesn't. So very few of those auto-installed apps ever see any use. iTunes (or "Apple Music", or whatever it's called now) might be the only exception.
    - kaolinite 11y ago
      Maybe for you (and me too) but for the general public, the default apps are used a hell of a lot. 50% of users use the default notes app[1], for example. Apple Maps (which based on the press, many might assume isn't used at all) has 3.5x the usage of Google Maps[1]. I don't know whether there are any other stats out there, but I suspect that for most people, there's no need to install a custom podcast app, for example, when the default one works just fine for them. [1] https://www.macstories.net/news/the-numbers-from-apples-wwdc-2015-keynote/ https://www.macstories.net/news/the-numbers-from-apples-wwdc...
      - rimantas 11y ago
        With iOS9 notes become quite fun.
- 11y ago
danboarder 11y ago
This reminds me of the early days of CompuServe and Prodigy, which had exclusive content*. It worked for a while until the open web became the bigger audience that dwarfed all others. I think the big players now may be repeating patterns of the past. Open standards tend to trump closed platforms over time. If this is the case it presents an opportunity to create a new open version of what Apple is doing now. Web 4.0? News publications launch exclusive online content 1990-94: http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/carlson/1990s.shtml http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/carlson/1990s.shtml
- z1mm32m4n 11y ago
  > Open standards tend to trump closed platforms over time. I certainly hope this is the case, because it scares me how much content is being centralized in Facebook in particular.
- intopieces 11y ago
  >Open standards tend to trump closed platforms over time. The opposite is true, and what is happening to the Internet is another example. Telephone, Radio, and Film used to be open but they have since been cornered by cartels. Tim Wu explains this excellently in his book, "The Master Switch."
  - danboarder 11y ago
    I will check out that book, thanks. But the history of the web shows how an open network killed the content silos of AOL, Prodigy, Compuserve, etc. Yes, now things seem to be swinging back, perhaps due to the popularity of mobile apps and poor user experience of the mobile web.
    - intopieces 11y ago
      >perhaps due to the popularity of mobile apps I believe this is the primary driver. We already have Facebook introducting "free limited Internet" to developing regions of India [0] and mobile carriers in the U.S. already allow certain apps to be excluded from data usage. The open Internet is not a guarantee, and the next generation of web users may not know the 'wild west' we did. [0]http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2476564,00.asp http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2476564,00.asp
fixxer 11y ago
Well, looks like somebody found a "cure" for adblock ;) I miss the Wired of ten years ago. Now whenever I pick one up I am immensely disappointed by the hype and marketing. I remember it being more rigorous with respect to both journalism and technical acumen. Edit: or not, per other post regarding adblock coming soon to apple.
- softbuilder 11y ago
  >I miss the Wired of ten years ago. This is what I said ten years ago! In truth Wired has always been a lot of hand-wavy hype wrapped around bits of legit interest. I think you just outgrow it eventually.
  - fixxer 11y ago
    I debated saying 20 years ago, but I didn't want to show my age.
  - modfodder 11y ago
    Those bits of interest have become more mainstream and the same content can be found in more detail elsewhere. 10-20 yrs ago Wired was often the first place to get that information (or at least the first without digging).
- gkop 11y ago
  Honestly, it was about 1000x better just 3 years ago :/
SyneRyder 11y ago
This could backfire. Surely this should result in a Google penalty against Wired.com for publishing thin content? https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/2604719?hl=en https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/2604719?hl=en If Wired wants the article to be exclusive on Apple News, fine, but in that case it should not be on the website. Keep it exclusively on Apple News. There is no content on this page beyond a headline.
- threeseed 11y ago
  It should be fine if they add it to their robots.txt file. It could alongside the other interesting exclusions: http://www.wired.com/robots.txt http://www.wired.com/robots.txt
  - codewithcheese 11y ago
    Some interesting disallows there such as Disallow: /topics/Brooklyn_Police_Department. Can anyone comment on why this is?
    - PhasmaFelis 11y ago
      And /topics/Advil? Wha?
    - chkuendig 11y ago
      That seems to pop up semi-frequently, It's basically a voluntary "right to forget" provided by the publishers. http://f.cl.ly/items/1o2k3u2J343O3y3X290J/Image%202014-04-07%20at%2012.22.04%20PM.png http://f.cl.ly/items/1o2k3u2J343O3y3X290J/Image%202014-04-07... http://harpers.org/robots.txt http://harpers.org/robots.txt https://twitter.com/waxpancake/statuses/453024948475293696 https://twitter.com/waxpancake/statuses/453024948475293696
      - codewithcheese 11y ago
        Very interesting, good to know. Thanks!
cobweb 11y ago
I don't get it. I go to wired, I follow the link to apple, and I get bounced back to wired???
- nailer 11y ago
  Ditto. iOS 9 too.
- cobweb 11y ago
  On reading it for the third time, I noticed the word app, which I must have missed before. So it's exclusive to the apple eco-system and probably pay-walled. I think I get it now.
  - deong 11y ago
    It's pay-walled in the sense that you need a several-hundred dollar iOS device. Otherwise no.
duncan_bayne 11y ago
Huh. I'm surprised to find an outfit like Wired intentionally breaking the web. On the other hand, that's one less distraction for me.
malchow 11y ago
I wonder if anyone sees Apple News as anything more than One More Aggregator? I would be curious for thoughts/articles on that subject.
xxdesmus 11y ago
Well then, one less website to visit. Thanks for making that decision easy Wired.
kristopolous 11y ago
Do you ever wonder what the conversations were like which led to decisions like this?
- kapitalx 11y ago
  This is how I imagine it went: Apple: "We'll give you a lot of money if you make content exclusive to us" Wired: "Lets trial run it with one article and see how it goes, and we'd like the exclusivity period to expire" Apple: "Sure, but we'll have to come back to the timed exclusivity, we think you'll cave"
  - smackfu 11y ago
    Or it could be: Apple: "We will feature Wired in the WWDC keynote, and give it a prominent place in the News app when people are choosing sources. In exchange, we want a few exclusive articles." Wired: "OK"
- eva1984 11y ago
  Pretty much Apple pays a deal to Wired for this exclusive treatment. But why Wired tries to show an empty article that humiliates everyone else is beyond me.
  - kristopolous 11y ago
    I'm going to say it's a matter of their CMS and cite Hanlon's razor - in this case replace "stupidity" with "very modest time and budget"
cpncrunch 11y ago
Some background here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10179458 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10179458
userbinator 11y ago
The question that immediately comes to my mind is how do they know whether that URL (the news.apple.com one) is being accessed from the app or not? It redirects immediately back to wired.com, so could it be as trivial as User-agent or some other header?
dweekly 11y ago
HTTP ERROR 418 Wrong Client The client you are using does not currently have access to this resource but may in the future as specified by the Expires header in the response. The user should either switch to a supported client as specified in the response body to access this resource or the current client should retry at the specified date. The current client MUST NOT retry the resource before the specified date.
- gizmo686 11y ago
  HTTP 418 is already reserved for teapots whom have been requested to make coffee (RFC2324, section 2.3.2[0]) [0] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2324 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2324
  - simula67 11y ago
    We can use existing REST methodology to serve coffee from coffee pots. Send a POST request to the coffee pot with parameters for the required type of coffee. The server on the coffee pot responds with 200 OK if it can process the request and makes the coffee. 500 if there was a problem. WHEN method is unnecessary, use GET to retrieve status. "418 I'm a teapot" is also unncessary, just use 500. What a short sighted protocol.
    - ecdavis 11y ago
      Look at the publication date.
- svckr 11y ago
  "Wrong Client" as in: HTTP ERROR 418 YOU'RE a teapot
- cpeterso 11y ago
  HTTP 402 Payment Required
sidcool 11y ago
Dear Wired, if you want us to buy an Apple device to read your article, good luck with that. Losing respect in tech industry is pretty easy. Be safe.
- SmellyGeekBoy 11y ago
  I don't think they have much left to lose, to be fair.
radicalbyte 11y ago
When I clicked on this link I was expecting to read satire about content locking. What could be more absurd than making "news" exclusive? Instead, it looks like Wired have officially "jumped the whale".
choppaface 11y ago
How different is this (from an ad biz perspective) from Facebook Instant Articles? Is it that Apple gets no cut from publisher-sold ads, but Facebook Instant Articles only use Facebook ads? Do either of these services have some sort of exclusivity clause (ala Youtube, where if you publish one place you have to publish to Youtube too)? EDIT: it looks like Facebook Instant Articles also takes 0% of publisher-served ads [1]. So it looks like this Apple News push is merely an attempt to match Facebook's product (and Wired screwed up messaging / accessibility here). I'm still curious as to if anybody can add commentary / context from an advertising point of view. IMO these events indicate a future where portals serve publisher content in a way that improves user experience (fewer ads, faster page load times) while the publishers catch up (rather than replace) their own native web experience. Publishers will want to own their distribution if it does them well. These plays (Apple, Facebook) may be less about poaching display dollars from Google than 1) cutting low-quality advertisers out of the network and 2) increasing hub engagement. I doubt the hubs monopolize the market but I'm definitely no expert [1] https://s0.wp.com/wp-content/themes/vip/facebook-instantarticles/library/docs/FB_IA_FAQS.pdf https://s0.wp.com/wp-content/themes/vip/facebook-instantarti... LOL the FB site is running on wordpress ...
JohnTHaller 11y ago
Additional fun fact: Publishers can't opt out of having their RSS feeds included in Apple News without signing up for an Apple ID. I wonder if that means Apple News will ignore robots.txt.
- exodust 11y ago
  Why would a publisher opt out of having their feeds visible to any particular platform? The whole point of making an RSS feed available is so that it's *available" to any client that can read it. As much as I don't like what Wired and Apple are doing in terms of using the web to promote native exclusivity, RSS should be open to all by default. As for robots.txt in web pages, I agree that Apple News should be respecting those.
  - JohnTHaller 11y ago
    Considering the way this is all working, there's a good chance Apple may filter ads out of RSS feeds. Or disallow launching a real web browser from Apple News in the future to keep consumers in one interface they control.
EGreg 11y ago
Here is the thing I don't know if a war on ads is coming. I mean, the Browser Sexurity Handbook details how 3rd party cookie policies are pretty schitzophrenic across browsers already (MSIE requires a privacy policy, Safari requires a "visit" to a domain which can be accomplished by POSTing into an iframe, Firefox does something else, and Chrome thankfully just works). But regardless, we should be moving past ads and to deals. Past eyeballs and to saving people time. Past destination sites and to tools that help people. Past building online personas and to improving real world experience. Ads means "here please click maybe you'll like this and eventually pay money for something." It's not the best we can do. Before the web, people used to have more real connections in real life. Look at pictures from before 1990 - people were out and knew others from their neighborhood! Now they compulsively check their phones every time they emit a sound because of some notification, and verbal communication has devolved into kthanxbai lol... and the lol is almost never an actual laugh. Think about it.
Animats 11y ago
"Meet the Superstar Architect Transforming NYC’s Skyline" sounds like an ad, anyway. That's not time-critical information. The fluff news in "Dwell", "Food and Wine", and "Drive" sections of many major newspapers are now generated by Demand Media and others of that ilk. This may be a non-problem. When we start seeing articles about presidential debates, wars, and other major events handled that way, it's time to pay attention.
- plonh 11y ago
  We just had a presidential debate hosted by CNN, so we are getting close.
jameslk 11y ago
This is the wrong direction. What users want are unobtrusive ads and what content creators want is to get paid. Apple and Facebook are trying to take advantage of this by pushing users to their AOL-esque walled gardens. We need a browser standard for built-in unobtrusive ads or payments so content creators can get paid and users don't get stuck with AOL 2.0.
- icebraining 11y ago
  Why do we need a browser standard for built-in unobtrusive ads? We already have a standard to carry ads - it's called HTML. Adding an out-of-band ad carrying system is not only, and in my opinion, an unethical subterfuge, as it won't work against heavy-handed ad-blockers anyway: they'll just evolve to block that too.
  - jameslk 11y ago
    The point isn't to force ads down the user's throat, it's to show ads in a way that's uniform and tolerable, as Apple is attempting to do with Apple News. An ad blocker can be built for Apple News too (and has been) but I'd rather that not be necessary in the first place.
- sangnoir 11y ago
  Apple is not "trying to take advantage of this" - it's an active participant! I'm sure there are several Sun Tzu quotes that can describe the unfolding proxy war.
- langarto 11y ago
  Users do not want unobstrusive ads. They may be willing to put up with them, but that is not the same than wanting them. Nobody in his sane mind wants ads, unobstrusive or not.
eva1984 11y ago
Wow, obvious Apple is no angel to everyone. But this is hardly new. I believe a lot of magazines released their article in print first then in their web edition for a wider public access. Only thing that is wrong here is this offensive reminder that iOS users now have privilege over everyone else. Smart move, Wired. It is an excellent advertisement for Apple News, but not so much for publisher themselves, I believe.
mendelk 11y ago
I have a silly question: If the conspiracy theorists are right, the whole ad-blocking on ios is a ploy to get the ad-starved publishers, and thus the masses, off the web-based internet and onto in-app content silos such as Apple News. If they're wildly successful, the only ones left on the traditional internet would be those not producing content for money. Does that mean I'll be able to experience the internet the way the old-timers reminisce? Before Eternal September[0]? I've always felt bad I missed thosed times, and while this would certainly be a regression for the society at large, I think that would be something I'd like to experience :) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September
- coldtea 11y ago
  Eternal September? The internet was still great from that regard (tons of people "not producing content for money"), no big central control, no FB/Google/Twitter/etc, until around the time we got Google. There was AOL of course, but that was mostly mocked by people on the "real" internet. >and while this would certainly be a regression for the society at large Actually, it might be a huge improvement. Technofiles will never go for this, but after a point technology in a societal context can have not just diminishing returns but even spoil good things (like going to a concert in your 20s without being glued to a smartphone screen).
  - cronjobber 11y ago
    > The internet was still great ... until around the time we got Google. Depressingly accurate. Alas, the probable trajectory is not all-out war on Google, but rather a number of plausible threats followed by a hammering out of market boundaries followed by a tacit non-compete between the players.
  - mootothemax 11y ago
    >The internet was still great... until around the time we got Google. Not that I necessarily agree with your assertion, it's worth emphasizing the reason that Google took off: search just plain sucked before Google came on the scene. Personally, my only real issue with Google is the decline in precise search result quality since they got rid of the + operator.
jeo1234 11y ago
If Wired makes this practice standard for articles on their website, I will seriously consider dropping my subscription. I understand that the two are not directly linked, but this new tactic seems toxic and I do not want to support it in any way.
binoyxj 11y ago
This is actually a good reason to use the native iOS push notification, instead of such thin content to grab eyeballs. The former is well targeted and less spammy IMO.
mirimir 11y ago
OK, so there's no web proxy to Apple News?
smsm42 11y ago
Couple of minutes ago I didn't know about Apple News and didn't care about a superstar architect. Now I still don't care about a superstar architect but already hate Apple News and Wired for presenting me with a link to an article I can not read.
- rndstr 11y ago
  I just made a mental note not to click on any wired link in the future.
  - amelius 11y ago
    Or buy any Apple device (to the extent you can actually "buy" one, in the meaning of owning it after you have paid for it).
    - kalleboo 11y ago
      And also move to the US (or some other supported country, I couldn't find a list within 2 Google searches)
  - billybilly1920 11y ago
    It would be nice if hacker news would allow you to block sites in your profile. I'd love to block any article on medium.com, wired.com or nytimes.com; they all seem to be empty fluff articles.
- m3rc 11y ago
  Wired's already a bad egg in my book for refusing to allow the first part of their articles in RSS and reader apps like Feedly. While every other website shows me the first paragraph in the app before I tap the link, Wired just gives their bullshit "This article first appeared on Wired" blurb
  - smsm42 11y ago
    That's extremely annoying behavior. I get where they coming from - if you read excerpts on RSS you don't visit the site for that, so no ad impressions - but I usually just ignore such sites altogether. I have no time to click on every link in the feed to just know what it is about.
eagsalazar2 11y ago
This article had comments initially which were all people bitching about how this was total bullshit. The comment section has since been removed.
declan 11y ago
This is disappointing. It's a move against the open Internet than Wired helped to popularize (I previously worked at Wired). It also is a slap in the face to Android and other non-iOS users. Disclaimer: My own startup released iOS and Android news apps this month that are in the same space as Apple News: https://recent.io/ https://recent.io/
binaryapparatus 11y ago
War is not so subtle any more. Lack of web browser on apple tv. Content blockers on iOS 9. Exclusive content. Makes me want to join ad company and help the fight on their side, just because. Fscked I know.
AriinPHD 11y ago
I can't even open it on an iOS 9 device. I'm either doing something wrong or this Apple News thing doesn't work at all...
- kalleboo 11y ago
  I think it's only available in the U.S
amelius 11y ago
> “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday” Shouldn't that be "may be" instead of "is being"?
brudgers 11y ago
[Ignoring the meta nature of this thread] If there's no well known work around for the paywall, this type of content from Wired shouldn't be on HN. On a personal note. it saddens me to see Wired deliberately making the world wide web suck.
- qntty 11y ago
  The notice that it's not available is the content in this case.
dsr_ 11y ago
If you can't see it until Tuesday, it's not news. It might be journalism, it might be editorial, it might be review, but it's not news.
- henriquemaia 11y ago
  Or it is _news_, but in a 19th century pre-telegraph kind of way.
shade23 11y ago
Why does clicking on the link redirect me to the same wired article?
snorrah 11y ago
It's not like this is a 'win' for Apple - the news app isn't globally available (I think it's just US?) so this sure doesn't do wonders for my opinion of them. Oh well guess I'll just wait a day and see if I even remember to go check back. (I probably won't, I have a bad memory)
circa 11y ago
Ted Moesby is the artichect, right?
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
jackmaney 11y ago
Welp, I don't think I'll ever read anything from Wired again.
tethra 11y ago
Wired have now joined apple on my list of companies to boycott for life. Personally I'll be adding any company to the list that joins in with this kind of crap - deliberately creating an online 'second class' is unacceptable. Don't let these bastards win.
- exelius 11y ago
  If it's not these bastards, it'll be some other bastards. Companies have to differentiate their products somehow.
libraryatnight 11y ago
Timed exclusives are already frustrating in video games, I don't need them creeping into my reading :(
justinlardinois 11y ago
Did anyone else notice that the hover text on the Apple News link is "Big Deal"? Not sure what to make of that.
Jimmy 11y ago
I am proud to say that I will never download the Apple News app.
Mikho 11y ago
Hence, I just don't read it at all. Tomorrow there will be other news and this article will be already history. Any extra friction, including extra click to go to Apple News — more churn.
egil 11y ago
The article was published with a new url: http://www.wired.com/2015/09/bjarke-ingels-2-world-trade-center-wtc-2/ http://www.wired.com/2015/09/bjarke-ingels-2-world-trade-cen...

302 points by esolyt 11y ago

Wired will be losing ad revenue due to Apple adding ad blocking abilities to mobile Safari. So, Wired moves content to Apple News which has ads that can't be blocked (and Apple conveniently takes a nice juicy cut of).

fezz 11y ago
This should almost be the title of the thread.
- stock_toaster 11y ago
  I can see it now. "Ad network makes money selling ads". Probably wouldn't have been upvoted as much though.
stevesearer 11y ago
I'm pretty sure they only take a cut of ads sold through their iAd system and take 0% cut for ads sold directly by the publication.
- cmelbye 11y ago
  I'm glad someone pointed this fact out. Source: https://developer.apple.com/news-publisher/ https://developer.apple.com/news-publisher/
- JohnTHaller 11y ago
  Yes and no. This is basically a little bit disingenuous. Today, most publications will use something like DoubleClick to manage their ads, sell a bunch directly to specific companies, setup bidding on some others via another provider hooked into the same system, and then use Google AdSense for the remnant inventory. From my reading of it, on Apple News, you're required to use iAd to manage the inventory. iAd allows you to do direct sales through it's own system. And then all the rest are remnant and handled through iAd. Apple locks out all other players from that large part of the ad market, including Google. Knowing Apple... especially Google. It's a brilliant two-pronged strategy to lock content providers and consumers into the Apple ecosystem.
  - daenney 11y ago
    That does not appear to be true: > Earn 100% of the revenue from ads you sell, and 70% when iAd sells ads for you. https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documentation/General/Conceptual/News_Publishing_Guide/MonetizingonNews.html https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documenta...
    - deong 11y ago
      That doesn't contradict his post saying "iAd allows you to do direct sales through it's own system".
      - daenney 11y ago
        It contradicts his implication that Apple will force you to use iAd, at least the way I'm interpreting it.
        deong 11y ago
        This (https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documentation/General/Conceptual/News_Publishing_Guide/FAQ.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40015407-CH15-SW1 https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documenta...) seems clearer to me. Quoting: How can I monetize my content? You can monetize your Apple News Format content with iAd, Apple’s advertising platform. Whether you sell your own ads or have iAd sell on your behalf, you’ll earn revenue from every impression in your articles and channels.
  - exelius 11y ago
    The setup you describe is only true of very small publishers (i.e. a single site). iAd is essentially a supply-side platform (SSP); just like DoubleClick. A large publisher like Wired will use what's called a demand-side platform (DSP) -- something like Auditude or Freewheel. This would allow you to manage ad sales between 3rd party ad networks, data partners, internal sales and remnant inventory in a way that provides the publisher with control over what ads get shown. A common setup is to bid an impression against multiple ad networks (and local inventory) based on the user's data profile (obtained from a data provider). Google consolidates all of this themselves, which makes it easier if you're small, but any major publisher is going to handle ad sales at least partially in house. Ad sales are the revenue stream, and you just don't outsource your revenue generation process -- period. There's just a conflict of interest in doing it any other way. A DSP wants to play multiple SSPs against each other to get the highest priced ads for its content while preserving the user experience (DSPs often include features that allow you restrict the number of times an ad shows to the same user, etc). The SSPs are looking to get the best results for their advertisers at the lowest price. It's not a brilliant move because platform lock-in is too easy to avoid thanks to the myriad of ad tech providers in the space. Apple will get some app developers and small sites with this, but 95% of the market has evolved past a solution like this into something far more "enterprise".
andrewstuart2 11y ago
They'd better be getting an extra cut for the exclusivity period, though. Otherwise that part would be pointless. They could just serve this page for only IOS9 devices based on user agent.
btown 11y ago
It's almost certain that Apple's long game is to make this the norm. If there's one surefire way to get people addicted to ad blockers, it's to make them available on mobile devices. Once enough content creators start moving content behind News-walls, then Apple can roll out desktop versions of News. And as people then start asking each other "how do I get ad blocking in my browser as well," Apple's well positioned to be the only unblockable advertising platform, period. They could even use iTunes as a vector to deliver an Apple News desktop app to Windows machines. It's brilliant and will completely change the balance of power in online advertising. Google will not be happy...
- lantern-manner 11y ago
  I don't think you're taking into account that websites are free to create their own apps, and advertise there. There's little incentive for a content creator to have their content off the net, and into someone else's apps. Im not understanding Wired's motivation here, but I'm not too concerned because Wired isn't the most intelligent publication in the first place.
  - Kankuro 11y ago
    "websites are free to create their own apps" The users may accept to install a few apps (Apple/Google/… News), but not one for each website.
  - qubex 11y ago
    I pine for the WIRED of yesteryear. The current publication is but a pallid, embarrassing shadow of a formerly brilliant publication. It's now on a par with VICE, GQ or some such, and quite frankly, it is heartbreaking. The guiding light of my youth essentially extinguished (particularly as I grew up in nineties Italy, from where it provided a fascinating and prescient window into the social aspects of tech). </rant>
- josteink 11y ago
  You assume everyone and their grandmother has Apple-equipment. Most of the world doesn't. Saying that you will only do business with those who has Apple-equipment is leaving out most of the market, and doing so would be suicide for most businesses.
jad 11y ago
I think there's almost no chance that the percentage of iOS users blocking ads is enough to meaningfully impact Wired's overall revenue from that story. Even given that ad blocking apps have been top sellers, it's still only available on iOS 9, which has been out less than a week. So surely revenue from all web users (without an ad blocker) outweigh the (presumably) tiny amount of ad revenue Wired will earn from Apple News. And even if all that were false, why would Wired alone give in so readily to what's basically bullying? It's just not a credible theory. Way more likely is that Apple is paying them a nice chunk of cash for the exclusivity to help market their News app. Same thing they did with HBO Now for the Apple TV, and with various albums for the iTunes Store and Apple Music.
- deong 11y ago
  My understanding of Apple News is that it has nothing to do with iOS 9 content blocking. Apple News is a dedicated app that functions somewhat like an RSS reader serving up a special Readability-style version of the content. Even if you don't install an ad-blocker in iOS 9, you still don't see banner ads and such in Apple News. That said, I imagine you're right and Apple just paid for the exclusive for marketing purposes.
  - qubex 11y ago
    The point that is being made is that by cutting off a fraction of mobile ad revenue by allowing blockers, Apple might be seen to be cynically herding content providers towards its walled-garden platform wherein iAd is the exclusive provider of adverts, which cannot be blocked. Whether this is the true intention of their strategy or merely a coincidence is a matter of some (understandably contentious) debate.
- simonh 11y ago
  > Even given that ad blocking apps have been top sellers, it's still only available on iOS 9, which has been out less than a week. iOS9 penetration is already past 50%(1). New versions usually get mass adoption very quickly. (1) http://www.macrumors.com/2015/09/21/apple-ios-9-50-percent/ http://www.macrumors.com/2015/09/21/apple-ios-9-50-percent/
smpetrey 11y ago
It should be noted, (although I may be alone here on this) I'm not seeing any ads on the Apple News story. My guess, is the story is to gauge traffic and _ad potential_.

lerxst 11y ago

I imagine their bounce rate will be very high if they continue doing this. Other news sites have done similar things such as make you participate in a survey before reading the article. In order for me to open this article before September 22, I would have to copy that link, paste it into an email to myself, open Mail on my phone, and open the link from my own email.

chillacy 11y ago
I guess the real question will be if the reduced pageviews offset the increased ad impressions. As much as I also hate those popups (I often leave the page), I imagine they've done enough split testing to know that it at least helps their bottom line in the short term.
- hudell 11y ago
  Well, I've seen a bigger website change their layout completely believing it would increase ad impressions, assuming that users scrolled down on their page. It went live, their profit was reduced to less than half, thousands of people lost their job. The new layout stayed.
burntwater 11y ago
Quora permanently lost me several years ago when they suddenly forced me to select five categories of interest before I could continue to the question I was interested in. Forcing me to do something I have no interest in and will never make use of is a good way to alienate me.
- bandicity 11y ago
  Quora requires registration to simply read it. That's at least going to lose them viewers who don't want to bother.
  - aclissold 11y ago
    Or multiple incognito/private windows :P

nathancahill 11y ago

Mods, please DON'T change this title. The post would become completely non-sensical.

dang 11y ago
The title you're reading is what we changed it to. The submitted title was "This story is exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday". We changed it to an exact quote from the article and put it in quotation marks. p.s. Please don't use uppercase for emphasis: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
- kuschku 11y ago
  How do we make text bold for emphasis? or should we just use UTF characters for that?
  - alayne 11y ago
    Please just write normally formatted sentences.
    - kuschku 11y ago
      As I answered to several other comments, this is not a helpful suggestion when most typographers suggest to use bold for emphasis of sans-serif fonts, as italic with sans-serif is less noticeable than 𝗯𝗼𝗹𝗱.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
        kuschku 11y ago
        But I want to have the typesetting ability to provide emphasis, distinction, quotes, like in a book. If I can’t get TeX or markdown, at least proper emphasis should be supported.

Navarr 11y ago

Odds Apple is paying them? Very high, right?

cpmsmith 11y ago
100% odds.

lfam 11y ago

Apple is implementing a content paywall at the device level.

narrator 11y ago
Theory: Apple wants to defeat Google by eliminating ads and making the purchase of the device the amortized payment for content. Analysis: The problem with this strategy is that Apple is going to have to scale to all the content in the world, in foreign languages, on obscure or controversial topics on a million blogs. Super niche content will fade, starved of app revenue and have to rely on native IOS ad with unblockable ads for distribution.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- jameshart 11y ago
  Apple has done a pretty good job of building and supporting a long tail of apps. They're working on it with music. Why can't they take that model to content?
  - narrator 11y ago
    Prediction: Apple Blogs. It's like the app store, but for blogs. You need a mac to create content for it. Free and premium blogs, In blog purchase, etc.
  - meeper16 11y ago
    This is because Apple knows very little about algorithmic internet-wide Search or much of anything on the algorithmic level when compared to Google. Think about the maps debacle, its horrible email search, its purchase of Chomp to help it figure out app search. Apple builds the nice looking robots, Google builds the brains.
  - sangnoir 11y ago
    > Apple has done a pretty good job of building and supporting a long tail of app I think "adequate" is a better description of Apples efforts. Discoverability is still awful on the App Store, after many years.

torrance 11y ago

Apple News isn't available in a lot of countries for whatever reason. So this not only means its inaccessible to non-iOS9 devices, but it's also inaccessible to, eg., all of New Zealand.

noob_learning 11y ago
I'm in NZ, you can change your region to US to get the new Apple News
- exodust 11y ago
  Worth trying only for short term curiosity. Beyond that it's a clumsy workaround with consequences for other apps and services that depend on the region being true.
  - joosters 11y ago
    Not sure why people are downvoting the comment though, it's a valid workaround if you needed to temporarily access something.
derefr 11y ago
I'm guessing it's just a paucity of news agencies in the given country that have set up a feed in Apple News format; Apple doesn't want to flip the switch for a country until they have a good default selection of that country's local feeds to let people pick from. I noticed that on the iOS9 beta, with my region set to Canada, the News app was unavailable, but on the springboard search view, the embedded news items were from (two) Canadian sources. So it seems like they're working on it.
kozukumi 11y ago
Indeed, this just confused me for a minute. I am in the UK and Apple News isn't available here yet.
AriinPHD 11y ago
This explains a lot ... I thought something was broken.

staunch 11y ago

Torrents of popular newspaper and magazine articles may become popular soon.

icebraining 11y ago
They already are - PDFs of the Economist appear every week on torrent sites.
- staunch 11y ago
  Like, much more popular though.

alayne 11y ago

I'm an Apple user, but I have no interest in Apple curated news via a dedicated app. I can't believe there's a significant market there.

pat2man 11y ago
A lot of people still go to say yahoo.com for their news. The default is good enough for them.
Reedx 11y ago
But it's a default auto-installed app (on iOS9) and the headlines are on the search / Siri Suggestions screen. I'd be surprised if it doesn't already have a huge market...
- beedogs 11y ago
  It doesn't. So very few of those auto-installed apps ever see any use. iTunes (or "Apple Music", or whatever it's called now) might be the only exception.
  - kaolinite 11y ago
    Maybe for you (and me too) but for the general public, the default apps are used a hell of a lot. 50% of users use the default notes app[1], for example. Apple Maps (which based on the press, many might assume isn't used at all) has 3.5x the usage of Google Maps[1]. I don't know whether there are any other stats out there, but I suspect that for most people, there's no need to install a custom podcast app, for example, when the default one works just fine for them. [1] https://www.macstories.net/news/the-numbers-from-apples-wwdc-2015-keynote/ https://www.macstories.net/news/the-numbers-from-apples-wwdc...
    - rimantas 11y ago
      With iOS9 notes become quite fun.
11y ago

danboarder 11y ago

This reminds me of the early days of CompuServe and Prodigy, which had exclusive content*. It worked for a while until the open web became the bigger audience that dwarfed all others. I think the big players now may be repeating patterns of the past. Open standards tend to trump closed platforms over time. If this is the case it presents an opportunity to create a new open version of what Apple is doing now. Web 4.0? News publications launch exclusive online content 1990-94: http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/carlson/1990s.shtml http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/carlson/1990s.shtml

z1mm32m4n 11y ago
> Open standards tend to trump closed platforms over time. I certainly hope this is the case, because it scares me how much content is being centralized in Facebook in particular.
intopieces 11y ago
>Open standards tend to trump closed platforms over time. The opposite is true, and what is happening to the Internet is another example. Telephone, Radio, and Film used to be open but they have since been cornered by cartels. Tim Wu explains this excellently in his book, "The Master Switch."
- danboarder 11y ago
  I will check out that book, thanks. But the history of the web shows how an open network killed the content silos of AOL, Prodigy, Compuserve, etc. Yes, now things seem to be swinging back, perhaps due to the popularity of mobile apps and poor user experience of the mobile web.
  - intopieces 11y ago
    >perhaps due to the popularity of mobile apps I believe this is the primary driver. We already have Facebook introducting "free limited Internet" to developing regions of India [0] and mobile carriers in the U.S. already allow certain apps to be excluded from data usage. The open Internet is not a guarantee, and the next generation of web users may not know the 'wild west' we did. [0]http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2476564,00.asp http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2476564,00.asp

fixxer 11y ago

Well, looks like somebody found a "cure" for adblock ;) I miss the Wired of ten years ago. Now whenever I pick one up I am immensely disappointed by the hype and marketing. I remember it being more rigorous with respect to both journalism and technical acumen. Edit: or not, per other post regarding adblock coming soon to apple.

softbuilder 11y ago
>I miss the Wired of ten years ago. This is what I said ten years ago! In truth Wired has always been a lot of hand-wavy hype wrapped around bits of legit interest. I think you just outgrow it eventually.
- fixxer 11y ago
  I debated saying 20 years ago, but I didn't want to show my age.
- modfodder 11y ago
  Those bits of interest have become more mainstream and the same content can be found in more detail elsewhere. 10-20 yrs ago Wired was often the first place to get that information (or at least the first without digging).
gkop 11y ago
Honestly, it was about 1000x better just 3 years ago :/

SyneRyder 11y ago

This could backfire. Surely this should result in a Google penalty against Wired.com for publishing thin content? https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/2604719?hl=en https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/2604719?hl=en If Wired wants the article to be exclusive on Apple News, fine, but in that case it should not be on the website. Keep it exclusively on Apple News. There is no content on this page beyond a headline.

threeseed 11y ago
It should be fine if they add it to their robots.txt file. It could alongside the other interesting exclusions: http://www.wired.com/robots.txt http://www.wired.com/robots.txt
- codewithcheese 11y ago
  Some interesting disallows there such as Disallow: /topics/Brooklyn_Police_Department. Can anyone comment on why this is?
  - PhasmaFelis 11y ago
    And /topics/Advil? Wha?
  - chkuendig 11y ago
    That seems to pop up semi-frequently, It's basically a voluntary "right to forget" provided by the publishers. http://f.cl.ly/items/1o2k3u2J343O3y3X290J/Image%202014-04-07%20at%2012.22.04%20PM.png http://f.cl.ly/items/1o2k3u2J343O3y3X290J/Image%202014-04-07... http://harpers.org/robots.txt http://harpers.org/robots.txt https://twitter.com/waxpancake/statuses/453024948475293696 https://twitter.com/waxpancake/statuses/453024948475293696
    - codewithcheese 11y ago
      Very interesting, good to know. Thanks!

cobweb 11y ago

I don't get it. I go to wired, I follow the link to apple, and I get bounced back to wired???

nailer 11y ago
Ditto. iOS 9 too.
cobweb 11y ago
On reading it for the third time, I noticed the word app, which I must have missed before. So it's exclusive to the apple eco-system and probably pay-walled. I think I get it now.
- deong 11y ago
  It's pay-walled in the sense that you need a several-hundred dollar iOS device. Otherwise no.

duncan_bayne 11y ago

Huh. I'm surprised to find an outfit like Wired intentionally breaking the web. On the other hand, that's one less distraction for me.

malchow 11y ago

I wonder if anyone sees Apple News as anything more than One More Aggregator? I would be curious for thoughts/articles on that subject.

xxdesmus 11y ago

Well then, one less website to visit. Thanks for making that decision easy Wired.

kristopolous 11y ago

Do you ever wonder what the conversations were like which led to decisions like this?

kapitalx 11y ago
This is how I imagine it went: Apple: "We'll give you a lot of money if you make content exclusive to us" Wired: "Lets trial run it with one article and see how it goes, and we'd like the exclusivity period to expire" Apple: "Sure, but we'll have to come back to the timed exclusivity, we think you'll cave"
- smackfu 11y ago
  Or it could be: Apple: "We will feature Wired in the WWDC keynote, and give it a prominent place in the News app when people are choosing sources. In exchange, we want a few exclusive articles." Wired: "OK"
eva1984 11y ago
Pretty much Apple pays a deal to Wired for this exclusive treatment. But why Wired tries to show an empty article that humiliates everyone else is beyond me.
- kristopolous 11y ago
  I'm going to say it's a matter of their CMS and cite Hanlon's razor - in this case replace "stupidity" with "very modest time and budget"

cpncrunch 11y ago

Some background here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10179458 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10179458

userbinator 11y ago

The question that immediately comes to my mind is how do they know whether that URL (the news.apple.com one) is being accessed from the app or not? It redirects immediately back to wired.com, so could it be as trivial as User-agent or some other header?

dweekly 11y ago

HTTP ERROR 418 Wrong Client The client you are using does not currently have access to this resource but may in the future as specified by the Expires header in the response. The user should either switch to a supported client as specified in the response body to access this resource or the current client should retry at the specified date. The current client MUST NOT retry the resource before the specified date.

gizmo686 11y ago
HTTP 418 is already reserved for teapots whom have been requested to make coffee (RFC2324, section 2.3.2[0]) [0] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2324 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2324
- simula67 11y ago
  We can use existing REST methodology to serve coffee from coffee pots. Send a POST request to the coffee pot with parameters for the required type of coffee. The server on the coffee pot responds with 200 OK if it can process the request and makes the coffee. 500 if there was a problem. WHEN method is unnecessary, use GET to retrieve status. "418 I'm a teapot" is also unncessary, just use 500. What a short sighted protocol.
  - ecdavis 11y ago
    Look at the publication date.
svckr 11y ago
"Wrong Client" as in: HTTP ERROR 418 YOU'RE a teapot
cpeterso 11y ago
HTTP 402 Payment Required

sidcool 11y ago

Dear Wired, if you want us to buy an Apple device to read your article, good luck with that. Losing respect in tech industry is pretty easy. Be safe.

SmellyGeekBoy 11y ago
I don't think they have much left to lose, to be fair.

radicalbyte 11y ago

When I clicked on this link I was expecting to read satire about content locking. What could be more absurd than making "news" exclusive? Instead, it looks like Wired have officially "jumped the whale".

choppaface 11y ago

How different is this (from an ad biz perspective) from Facebook Instant Articles? Is it that Apple gets no cut from publisher-sold ads, but Facebook Instant Articles only use Facebook ads? Do either of these services have some sort of exclusivity clause (ala Youtube, where if you publish one place you have to publish to Youtube too)? EDIT: it looks like Facebook Instant Articles also takes 0% of publisher-served ads [1]. So it looks like this Apple News push is merely an attempt to match Facebook's product (and Wired screwed up messaging / accessibility here). I'm still curious as to if anybody can add commentary / context from an advertising point of view. IMO these events indicate a future where portals serve publisher content in a way that improves user experience (fewer ads, faster page load times) while the publishers catch up (rather than replace) their own native web experience. Publishers will want to own their distribution if it does them well. These plays (Apple, Facebook) may be less about poaching display dollars from Google than 1) cutting low-quality advertisers out of the network and 2) increasing hub engagement. I doubt the hubs monopolize the market but I'm definitely no expert [1] https://s0.wp.com/wp-content/themes/vip/facebook-instantarticles/library/docs/FB_IA_FAQS.pdf https://s0.wp.com/wp-content/themes/vip/facebook-instantarti... LOL the FB site is running on wordpress ...

JohnTHaller 11y ago

Additional fun fact: Publishers can't opt out of having their RSS feeds included in Apple News without signing up for an Apple ID. I wonder if that means Apple News will ignore robots.txt.

exodust 11y ago
Why would a publisher opt out of having their feeds visible to any particular platform? The whole point of making an RSS feed available is so that it's *available" to any client that can read it. As much as I don't like what Wired and Apple are doing in terms of using the web to promote native exclusivity, RSS should be open to all by default. As for robots.txt in web pages, I agree that Apple News should be respecting those.
- JohnTHaller 11y ago
  Considering the way this is all working, there's a good chance Apple may filter ads out of RSS feeds. Or disallow launching a real web browser from Apple News in the future to keep consumers in one interface they control.

EGreg 11y ago

Here is the thing I don't know if a war on ads is coming. I mean, the Browser Sexurity Handbook details how 3rd party cookie policies are pretty schitzophrenic across browsers already (MSIE requires a privacy policy, Safari requires a "visit" to a domain which can be accomplished by POSTing into an iframe, Firefox does something else, and Chrome thankfully just works). But regardless, we should be moving past ads and to deals. Past eyeballs and to saving people time. Past destination sites and to tools that help people. Past building online personas and to improving real world experience. Ads means "here please click maybe you'll like this and eventually pay money for something." It's not the best we can do. Before the web, people used to have more real connections in real life. Look at pictures from before 1990 - people were out and knew others from their neighborhood! Now they compulsively check their phones every time they emit a sound because of some notification, and verbal communication has devolved into kthanxbai lol... and the lol is almost never an actual laugh. Think about it.

Animats 11y ago

"Meet the Superstar Architect Transforming NYC’s Skyline" sounds like an ad, anyway. That's not time-critical information. The fluff news in "Dwell", "Food and Wine", and "Drive" sections of many major newspapers are now generated by Demand Media and others of that ilk. This may be a non-problem. When we start seeing articles about presidential debates, wars, and other major events handled that way, it's time to pay attention.

plonh 11y ago
We just had a presidential debate hosted by CNN, so we are getting close.

jameslk 11y ago

This is the wrong direction. What users want are unobtrusive ads and what content creators want is to get paid. Apple and Facebook are trying to take advantage of this by pushing users to their AOL-esque walled gardens. We need a browser standard for built-in unobtrusive ads or payments so content creators can get paid and users don't get stuck with AOL 2.0.

icebraining 11y ago
Why do we need a browser standard for built-in unobtrusive ads? We already have a standard to carry ads - it's called HTML. Adding an out-of-band ad carrying system is not only, and in my opinion, an unethical subterfuge, as it won't work against heavy-handed ad-blockers anyway: they'll just evolve to block that too.
- jameslk 11y ago
  The point isn't to force ads down the user's throat, it's to show ads in a way that's uniform and tolerable, as Apple is attempting to do with Apple News. An ad blocker can be built for Apple News too (and has been) but I'd rather that not be necessary in the first place.
sangnoir 11y ago
Apple is not "trying to take advantage of this" - it's an active participant! I'm sure there are several Sun Tzu quotes that can describe the unfolding proxy war.
langarto 11y ago
Users do not want unobstrusive ads. They may be willing to put up with them, but that is not the same than wanting them. Nobody in his sane mind wants ads, unobstrusive or not.

eva1984 11y ago

Wow, obvious Apple is no angel to everyone. But this is hardly new. I believe a lot of magazines released their article in print first then in their web edition for a wider public access. Only thing that is wrong here is this offensive reminder that iOS users now have privilege over everyone else. Smart move, Wired. It is an excellent advertisement for Apple News, but not so much for publisher themselves, I believe.

mendelk 11y ago

I have a silly question: If the conspiracy theorists are right, the whole ad-blocking on ios is a ploy to get the ad-starved publishers, and thus the masses, off the web-based internet and onto in-app content silos such as Apple News. If they're wildly successful, the only ones left on the traditional internet would be those not producing content for money. Does that mean I'll be able to experience the internet the way the old-timers reminisce? Before Eternal September[0]? I've always felt bad I missed thosed times, and while this would certainly be a regression for the society at large, I think that would be something I'd like to experience :) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September

coldtea 11y ago
Eternal September? The internet was still great from that regard (tons of people "not producing content for money"), no big central control, no FB/Google/Twitter/etc, until around the time we got Google. There was AOL of course, but that was mostly mocked by people on the "real" internet. >and while this would certainly be a regression for the society at large Actually, it might be a huge improvement. Technofiles will never go for this, but after a point technology in a societal context can have not just diminishing returns but even spoil good things (like going to a concert in your 20s without being glued to a smartphone screen).
- cronjobber 11y ago
  > The internet was still great ... until around the time we got Google. Depressingly accurate. Alas, the probable trajectory is not all-out war on Google, but rather a number of plausible threats followed by a hammering out of market boundaries followed by a tacit non-compete between the players.
- mootothemax 11y ago
  >The internet was still great... until around the time we got Google. Not that I necessarily agree with your assertion, it's worth emphasizing the reason that Google took off: search just plain sucked before Google came on the scene. Personally, my only real issue with Google is the decline in precise search result quality since they got rid of the + operator.

jeo1234 11y ago

If Wired makes this practice standard for articles on their website, I will seriously consider dropping my subscription. I understand that the two are not directly linked, but this new tactic seems toxic and I do not want to support it in any way.

binoyxj 11y ago

This is actually a good reason to use the native iOS push notification, instead of such thin content to grab eyeballs. The former is well targeted and less spammy IMO.

mirimir 11y ago

OK, so there's no web proxy to Apple News?

smsm42 11y ago

Couple of minutes ago I didn't know about Apple News and didn't care about a superstar architect. Now I still don't care about a superstar architect but already hate Apple News and Wired for presenting me with a link to an article I can not read.

rndstr 11y ago
I just made a mental note not to click on any wired link in the future.
- amelius 11y ago
  Or buy any Apple device (to the extent you can actually "buy" one, in the meaning of owning it after you have paid for it).
  - kalleboo 11y ago
    And also move to the US (or some other supported country, I couldn't find a list within 2 Google searches)
- billybilly1920 11y ago
  It would be nice if hacker news would allow you to block sites in your profile. I'd love to block any article on medium.com, wired.com or nytimes.com; they all seem to be empty fluff articles.
m3rc 11y ago
Wired's already a bad egg in my book for refusing to allow the first part of their articles in RSS and reader apps like Feedly. While every other website shows me the first paragraph in the app before I tap the link, Wired just gives their bullshit "This article first appeared on Wired" blurb
- smsm42 11y ago
  That's extremely annoying behavior. I get where they coming from - if you read excerpts on RSS you don't visit the site for that, so no ad impressions - but I usually just ignore such sites altogether. I have no time to click on every link in the feed to just know what it is about.

eagsalazar2 11y ago

This article had comments initially which were all people bitching about how this was total bullshit. The comment section has since been removed.

declan 11y ago

This is disappointing. It's a move against the open Internet than Wired helped to popularize (I previously worked at Wired). It also is a slap in the face to Android and other non-iOS users. Disclaimer: My own startup released iOS and Android news apps this month that are in the same space as Apple News: https://recent.io/ https://recent.io/

binaryapparatus 11y ago

War is not so subtle any more. Lack of web browser on apple tv. Content blockers on iOS 9. Exclusive content. Makes me want to join ad company and help the fight on their side, just because. Fscked I know.

AriinPHD 11y ago

I can't even open it on an iOS 9 device. I'm either doing something wrong or this Apple News thing doesn't work at all...

kalleboo 11y ago
I think it's only available in the U.S

amelius 11y ago

> “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday” Shouldn't that be "may be" instead of "is being"?

brudgers 11y ago

[Ignoring the meta nature of this thread] If there's no well known work around for the paywall, this type of content from Wired shouldn't be on HN. On a personal note. it saddens me to see Wired deliberately making the world wide web suck.

qntty 11y ago
The notice that it's not available is the content in this case.

dsr_ 11y ago

If you can't see it until Tuesday, it's not news. It might be journalism, it might be editorial, it might be review, but it's not news.

henriquemaia 11y ago
Or it is _news_, but in a 19th century pre-telegraph kind of way.

shade23 11y ago

Why does clicking on the link redirect me to the same wired article?

snorrah 11y ago

It's not like this is a 'win' for Apple - the news app isn't globally available (I think it's just US?) so this sure doesn't do wonders for my opinion of them. Oh well guess I'll just wait a day and see if I even remember to go check back. (I probably won't, I have a bad memory)

circa 11y ago

Ted Moesby is the artichect, right?

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

jackmaney 11y ago

Welp, I don't think I'll ever read anything from Wired again.

tethra 11y ago

Wired have now joined apple on my list of companies to boycott for life. Personally I'll be adding any company to the list that joins in with this kind of crap - deliberately creating an online 'second class' is unacceptable. Don't let these bastards win.

exelius 11y ago
If it's not these bastards, it'll be some other bastards. Companies have to differentiate their products somehow.

libraryatnight 11y ago

Timed exclusives are already frustrating in video games, I don't need them creeping into my reading :(

justinlardinois 11y ago

Did anyone else notice that the hover text on the Apple News link is "Big Deal"? Not sure what to make of that.

Jimmy 11y ago

I am proud to say that I will never download the Apple News app.

Mikho 11y ago

Hence, I just don't read it at all. Tomorrow there will be other news and this article will be already history. Any extra friction, including extra click to go to Apple News — more churn.

egil 11y ago

The article was published with a new url: http://www.wired.com/2015/09/bjarke-ingels-2-world-trade-center-wtc-2/ http://www.wired.com/2015/09/bjarke-ingels-2-world-trade-cen...