4 ms·

> Surprisingly, the company is seeing little change in the cost of impressions or the visibility of its ads on the internet, she said. If/when other companies

by olb 10y ago

> Surprisingly, the company is seeing little change in the cost of impressions or the visibility of its ads on the internet, she said. If/when other companies switch to this strategy, they’ll all be competing for less inventory and cost will go up accordingly.

xbmcuser 10y ago
At the same time good content providers will be paid more. So overall it is a good thing for the web. Content farming won't be worth much either.
- soared 10y ago
  A good thing for the big players, not the web. Everyone else (like me) me pays for their hosting with a few dollars a month in ad revenue will lose out.
  - manmal 10y ago
    Which seems to be fair if those ads don't provide any real leads.
- pilif 10y ago
  I'm not so sure, but I would love to be proven wrong. The issue I'm seeing is that there are many orders or magnitude more potential content providers out there than people are willing to manually validate and white-list. This might lead us to a situation where only the largest content providers/creators still get access to ad money which in turn will make it impossible for creators targeting a more niche audience to still have a chance in the market. Case in point: lately I'm totally into science videos on YouTube. From the more mainstream "Space Time" to the now-not-as-niche-as-in-2012 "Cody's Lab". While the latter doesn't share the former's production values nor budget, it's YouTube ad revenue that allows both to exist and to me personally, both provide equal value. It concerns me that in the future, if this trend continues, only one of the two will have a chance to survive.
  - rtx 10y ago
    Good content can be many things.
  - user5994461 10y ago
    Niche creators never had a chance in the first place. The few pennies you get for thousands of impression don't cover the expenses to run the site or the time to write the content.
    - AndrewUnmuted 10y ago
      Tell that to the thousands of niche podcasters out there who sustain their programs through marketing partnerships. Niche creators do stand a chance. They just need the opportunity to reach their audience with a degree of intimacy and trust that the horrific scourge of mainstream online video and corporate 'journalism' do not and cannot offer. Certain media can enable this for their viewers and others less so. It's no cliche to say that medium is the message in this context. Native advertising in podcasting is proof that not all online advertising has to consist of bludgeoning ignoramuses over the head with colorful nonsense within the infinite scroll of their Facebook feed. It can be about legitimate respect for a brand and a brand's legitimate respect for it's engaged, targeted niche demographic. But at the current rate of things, the web will require another massive spree of innovation to fix the tragedies caused by Facebook and Google over the past 10+ years to ever reach this point.
      - douche 10y ago
        Podcast advertising is really not the same as the ad networks on a blog or website. It's far more analogous to the advert spots that radio does. It doesn't even need to be particularly native advertising. I've listened to a bunch of ads on Dan Carlin's Hardcore History that are completely unrelated to the subject of the podcast.
        AndrewUnmuted 10y ago
        I believe you're mistaken. At the end of every Hardcore History episode, Dan Carlin recommends an Audible book related to that day's topic. It doesn't get more native than that. Also, the comment I was responding to was using YouTube ads as an example, which are temporally inserted, very similar to podcast and radio ads. When media consumption demands true engagement of both time and attention, the ad quality improves. Even the best niche digital video content on YouTube is too low-brow to offer a comparable experience to viewers. Again - the medium is the message.

by olb 10y ago

xbmcuser 10y ago

At the same time good content providers will be paid more. So overall it is a good thing for the web. Content farming won't be worth much either.

soared 10y ago
A good thing for the big players, not the web. Everyone else (like me) me pays for their hosting with a few dollars a month in ad revenue will lose out.
- manmal 10y ago
  Which seems to be fair if those ads don't provide any real leads.
pilif 10y ago
I'm not so sure, but I would love to be proven wrong. The issue I'm seeing is that there are many orders or magnitude more potential content providers out there than people are willing to manually validate and white-list. This might lead us to a situation where only the largest content providers/creators still get access to ad money which in turn will make it impossible for creators targeting a more niche audience to still have a chance in the market. Case in point: lately I'm totally into science videos on YouTube. From the more mainstream "Space Time" to the now-not-as-niche-as-in-2012 "Cody's Lab". While the latter doesn't share the former's production values nor budget, it's YouTube ad revenue that allows both to exist and to me personally, both provide equal value. It concerns me that in the future, if this trend continues, only one of the two will have a chance to survive.
- rtx 10y ago
  Good content can be many things.
- user5994461 10y ago
  Niche creators never had a chance in the first place. The few pennies you get for thousands of impression don't cover the expenses to run the site or the time to write the content.
  - AndrewUnmuted 10y ago
    Tell that to the thousands of niche podcasters out there who sustain their programs through marketing partnerships. Niche creators do stand a chance. They just need the opportunity to reach their audience with a degree of intimacy and trust that the horrific scourge of mainstream online video and corporate 'journalism' do not and cannot offer. Certain media can enable this for their viewers and others less so. It's no cliche to say that medium is the message in this context. Native advertising in podcasting is proof that not all online advertising has to consist of bludgeoning ignoramuses over the head with colorful nonsense within the infinite scroll of their Facebook feed. It can be about legitimate respect for a brand and a brand's legitimate respect for it's engaged, targeted niche demographic. But at the current rate of things, the web will require another massive spree of innovation to fix the tragedies caused by Facebook and Google over the past 10+ years to ever reach this point.
    - douche 10y ago
      Podcast advertising is really not the same as the ad networks on a blog or website. It's far more analogous to the advert spots that radio does. It doesn't even need to be particularly native advertising. I've listened to a bunch of ads on Dan Carlin's Hardcore History that are completely unrelated to the subject of the podcast.
      - AndrewUnmuted 10y ago
        I believe you're mistaken. At the end of every Hardcore History episode, Dan Carlin recommends an Audible book related to that day's topic. It doesn't get more native than that. Also, the comment I was responding to was using YouTube ads as an example, which are temporally inserted, very similar to podcast and radio ads. When media consumption demands true engagement of both time and attention, the ad quality improves. Even the best niche digital video content on YouTube is too low-brow to offer a comparable experience to viewers. Again - the medium is the message.