4 ms·
People are willing to pay for good content. e.g. Wikipedia receives vast amounts of donations. Not only are people willing to pay money, they are willing to do
by namelost 9y ago
People are willing to pay for good content. e.g. Wikipedia receives vast amounts of donations. Not only are people willing to pay money, they are willing to do it if even if the content is otherwise free.
The problem is that most of the time, ad-supported websites become experts in creating clickbait and lose their ability to create content that worth any money. It is the ads that are killing the ad-supported web, it is a race to the bottom.
- naravara 9y ago>The problem is that most of the time, ad-supported websites become experts in creating clickbait and lose their ability to create content that worth any money. Depends. Some websites have a hybrid model where they have a free tier and a subscription tier that removes ads. I think that works well provided the free tier isn’t too invasive about the advertising. What the internet really needs is a standardised format for “tipping” for content. I’d be happy to send a little money to a website that I visit without having to subscribe or put payment information in. Especially true of something like the newspaper. I don’t actually like the NYT or Post as businesses enough to subscribe, but in the rare occasion they actually publish some worthwhile journalism rather than “let’s interview some idiots and see if they still like Trump” then sure I’d pay whatever an ad click is worth for that.