4 ms·

It’s a great decision and glad they did it. But subscription revenue is now a much bigger part of NYT’s overall revenue and ad tech CPMs are declining year ove

It’s a great decision and glad they did it. But subscription revenue is now a much bigger part of NYT’s overall revenue and ad tech CPMs are declining year over year. So it’s not a hard decision anymore.

mc32 6y ago
If true this may have further tack on good effects like fewer click bait headlines and fewer errors in reporting with less pressure to get things out before details emerge.
- agentdrtran 6y ago
  These things aren't inentionally done to generate click revenue at any major outlet.
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    There's hardly any other reason to do it. Blowing your credibility like this hurts subscription revenue, so the only goal must be boosting your drive-by revenue (i.e. ad impressions).
  - michaelt 6y ago
    That's a bit no-true-scotsman isn't it? People are bitching about 'clickbait headlines' on the Easyjet hack post right now - and that's an article from the BBC.
  - wpietri 6y ago
    [citation needed]
  - KoftaBob 6y ago
    Sure...
- IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
  "Clickbait" used to mean "Ten Reasons Clickbait isn't what it used to be... Number 8 will surprise you"! Nowadays, people seem to complain about any headline that in any way has the potential to make people want to read the article. From my anecdotal experience with editors at better publications (such as the NYT), they care far less about individual articles' metrics than people seem to believe. At many of these publications, writers do not even have access to read metrics. (Bloomberg is the example I'm sure of, but there are others)
  - notatoad 6y ago
    >writers do not even have access to read metrics do the writers get to write the headlines though? i thought that was the editor's job, who surely does have access to the metrics.
  - wpietri 6y ago
    If the title is written in a way that withholds key information when it could just as well be included, I'm willing to call that clickbait. A headline alone shouldn't make me want to read the article. From my perspective, the headline's job is to let me know whether the contents are valuable enough to me that I want to read the article.
  - mc32 6y ago
    Clickbait and linkbait were new SEO tools in the late aughts. Before the advent of this, most headlines tried to be relevant though with occasional good puns and pizazz. But mostly The Enquirer and the Daily News were outliers and made fun of for their routine exaggerations.
  - ramblenode 6y ago
    > "Clickbait" used to mean "Ten Reasons Clickbait isn't what it used to be... Number 8 will surprise you"! I think the definition has expanded at the same time that the clickthrough/SEO/likes/dopamine optimization has become embraced by editors, who write the headlines. To me, clickbait is more about substance than style. It's an attentional lure into an article with disappointing substance, to varying extents. Various editors will stylize the headline for the sweet tooth of their demographic.
look_lookatme 6y ago
They are still going to collect data about you and sell it to third parties.

mc32 6y ago

If true this may have further tack on good effects like fewer click bait headlines and fewer errors in reporting with less pressure to get things out before details emerge.

agentdrtran 6y ago
These things aren't inentionally done to generate click revenue at any major outlet.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  There's hardly any other reason to do it. Blowing your credibility like this hurts subscription revenue, so the only goal must be boosting your drive-by revenue (i.e. ad impressions).
- michaelt 6y ago
  That's a bit no-true-scotsman isn't it? People are bitching about 'clickbait headlines' on the Easyjet hack post right now - and that's an article from the BBC.
- wpietri 6y ago
  [citation needed]
- KoftaBob 6y ago
  Sure...
IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
"Clickbait" used to mean "Ten Reasons Clickbait isn't what it used to be... Number 8 will surprise you"! Nowadays, people seem to complain about any headline that in any way has the potential to make people want to read the article. From my anecdotal experience with editors at better publications (such as the NYT), they care far less about individual articles' metrics than people seem to believe. At many of these publications, writers do not even have access to read metrics. (Bloomberg is the example I'm sure of, but there are others)
- notatoad 6y ago
  >writers do not even have access to read metrics do the writers get to write the headlines though? i thought that was the editor's job, who surely does have access to the metrics.
- wpietri 6y ago
  If the title is written in a way that withholds key information when it could just as well be included, I'm willing to call that clickbait. A headline alone shouldn't make me want to read the article. From my perspective, the headline's job is to let me know whether the contents are valuable enough to me that I want to read the article.
- mc32 6y ago
  Clickbait and linkbait were new SEO tools in the late aughts. Before the advent of this, most headlines tried to be relevant though with occasional good puns and pizazz. But mostly The Enquirer and the Daily News were outliers and made fun of for their routine exaggerations.
- ramblenode 6y ago
  > "Clickbait" used to mean "Ten Reasons Clickbait isn't what it used to be... Number 8 will surprise you"! I think the definition has expanded at the same time that the clickthrough/SEO/likes/dopamine optimization has become embraced by editors, who write the headlines. To me, clickbait is more about substance than style. It's an attentional lure into an article with disappointing substance, to varying extents. Various editors will stylize the headline for the sweet tooth of their demographic.

look_lookatme 6y ago

They are still going to collect data about you and sell it to third parties.