4 ms·

Bring back traditional advertising. No user profiling, no retargeting, no data collection. Pay for exposure and not clicks. Problem solved. Micropayments is a r

Bring back traditional advertising. No user profiling, no retargeting, no data collection. Pay for exposure and not clicks. Problem solved. Micropayments is a red herring. Print newspapers use to cost what, 50c a piece? And that included an absolutely massive printing, sales and distribution infrastructure. It is preposterous that digital publishing would cost more.

mcherm 6y ago
That cost also was supported by significant advertising revenues, including things like a "classified ads section" and "want ads", whole categories that now support separate industries.
kevsim 6y ago
I think if the world switched back to traditional advertising (which on the web for me means contextual targeting) and we stopped allowing third party ads to run a bunch of JS, I'd be willing to switch off my ad blockers. Until then, I'm afraid these publications won't be get paid for my eyes/clicks.
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  Another problem with online ads vs traditional media is the lack of human review. I know I can trust ads that are shown on public transport or in a major printed magazine/newspaper to not be a fly-by-night scam, malware or bullshit dropshipping operation. On the web, I know I can not trust anything because none of it is reviewed, the ads change depending on the time of day and who looks at them (targeting) and stuff like Taboola/Outbrain are running their entire business on churning out obnoxious content.
- chrisdinn 6y ago
  Underrated idea but very complex in practice. Contextual is coming back regardless as third-party cookies go away. But, I think “traditional” in this sense means brand advertising with broad reach, not micro-targeted messages for narrow audience. Like, why don’t you see nearly as many Coke ads online as you do IRL? Hypothetically, this kind of advertiser wants “brand safe” context (high-quality, inoffensive, not-too-weird) but is otherwise mostly looking to reach as many people as possible in its core demographics. Figuring out if something is brand safe at the margin is pretty tough and you actually can’t trust ad exchanges for this signal, so that’s what at least some of that JS from advertisers is for. Also, “the margins” on the internet are huge, likely most of the page. Internet has not done well here, traditionally. These advertisers traditionally loved primetime TV and glossy magazines, with high production values and usually safe content. A surprising amount of this brand money is still in traditional linear TV advertising, despite the fact that most key demos have already given up on linear TV.
flexie 6y ago
Developers cost a lot more than typographers and delivery boys and you need a lot of them to run a modern online media. A developer on staff is sort of like a subscription that the newspaper pays. The way to bring back advertisement to newspapers is to use antitrust rules and to start taxing search engines and social networks. When Facebook or Google runs an ad for my local gym, it is taxed in some remote tropical island (where it's usually not taxed at all). When my local newspaper runs the same ad, it's taxed locally. Basically, where I see the ad. I don't like advertisement in newspapers more than the next guy but that was how our democracy worked. News media got paid. With that money they could do journalism. Now, most of that money goes to a handful of companies that do very little to keep a check on politicians.
- wodenokoto 6y ago
  > Developers cost a lot more than typographers and delivery boys and you need a lot of them to run a modern online media. A developer on staff is sort of like a subscription that the newspaper pays. That's quite amazing. Then what was the whole point of going online (broadly speaking), if not to decrease delivery cost of articles?
  - helsinkiandrew 6y ago
    > Then what was the whole point of going online (broadly speaking), if not to decrease delivery cost of articles? To chase the audience that had gone online. The newspapers were loosing customers to other sites that could produce articles cheaply themselves or republish newswire stories or rely on content from users and didn't have the overhead of a traditional newspaper
    - ricardobeat 6y ago
      > didn't have the overhead of a traditional newspaper Hm. So you are saying going online decreases costs? Can't have it both ways...
      - helsinkiandrew 6y ago
tannhaeuser 6y ago
FWIW, media doesn't reach me at all anymore in EU with massive cookie banners everywhere (which is a good thing). Maybe I'm not in the target demographic anymore ;) but I can't believe advertisers don't see a dent in impressions. In fact, their continued reliance on targeted advertising makes me believe CTRs and other metrics are manufactured anyway. It's not like GOOG and FB figures can be verified independently.
dinoreic 6y ago
I assume readership base per particular publication is lower then before plus when in open market they get lower $ for x views then they used to.
jdietrich 6y ago
>Problem solved. Nope. Ad CPMs in the print era were an order of magnitude higher than today. All of the shady online advertising tactics are an effort to improve CPMs and eke out something resembling a functioning business model. Removing those tricks just means making less money, for businesses who are already barely surviving. Print newspapers used to cost 50c because of the classified section. Online news didn't kill the newspaper business - Craigslist, Zillow and Monster did.

mcherm 6y ago

That cost also was supported by significant advertising revenues, including things like a "classified ads section" and "want ads", whole categories that now support separate industries.

kevsim 6y ago

I think if the world switched back to traditional advertising (which on the web for me means contextual targeting) and we stopped allowing third party ads to run a bunch of JS, I'd be willing to switch off my ad blockers. Until then, I'm afraid these publications won't be get paid for my eyes/clicks.

Nextgrid 6y ago
Another problem with online ads vs traditional media is the lack of human review. I know I can trust ads that are shown on public transport or in a major printed magazine/newspaper to not be a fly-by-night scam, malware or bullshit dropshipping operation. On the web, I know I can not trust anything because none of it is reviewed, the ads change depending on the time of day and who looks at them (targeting) and stuff like Taboola/Outbrain are running their entire business on churning out obnoxious content.
chrisdinn 6y ago
Underrated idea but very complex in practice. Contextual is coming back regardless as third-party cookies go away. But, I think “traditional” in this sense means brand advertising with broad reach, not micro-targeted messages for narrow audience. Like, why don’t you see nearly as many Coke ads online as you do IRL? Hypothetically, this kind of advertiser wants “brand safe” context (high-quality, inoffensive, not-too-weird) but is otherwise mostly looking to reach as many people as possible in its core demographics. Figuring out if something is brand safe at the margin is pretty tough and you actually can’t trust ad exchanges for this signal, so that’s what at least some of that JS from advertisers is for. Also, “the margins” on the internet are huge, likely most of the page. Internet has not done well here, traditionally. These advertisers traditionally loved primetime TV and glossy magazines, with high production values and usually safe content. A surprising amount of this brand money is still in traditional linear TV advertising, despite the fact that most key demos have already given up on linear TV.

flexie 6y ago

Developers cost a lot more than typographers and delivery boys and you need a lot of them to run a modern online media. A developer on staff is sort of like a subscription that the newspaper pays. The way to bring back advertisement to newspapers is to use antitrust rules and to start taxing search engines and social networks. When Facebook or Google runs an ad for my local gym, it is taxed in some remote tropical island (where it's usually not taxed at all). When my local newspaper runs the same ad, it's taxed locally. Basically, where I see the ad. I don't like advertisement in newspapers more than the next guy but that was how our democracy worked. News media got paid. With that money they could do journalism. Now, most of that money goes to a handful of companies that do very little to keep a check on politicians.

wodenokoto 6y ago
> Developers cost a lot more than typographers and delivery boys and you need a lot of them to run a modern online media. A developer on staff is sort of like a subscription that the newspaper pays. That's quite amazing. Then what was the whole point of going online (broadly speaking), if not to decrease delivery cost of articles?
- helsinkiandrew 6y ago
  > Then what was the whole point of going online (broadly speaking), if not to decrease delivery cost of articles? To chase the audience that had gone online. The newspapers were loosing customers to other sites that could produce articles cheaply themselves or republish newswire stories or rely on content from users and didn't have the overhead of a traditional newspaper
  - ricardobeat 6y ago
    > didn't have the overhead of a traditional newspaper Hm. So you are saying going online decreases costs? Can't have it both ways...
    - helsinkiandrew 6y ago

tannhaeuser 6y ago

FWIW, media doesn't reach me at all anymore in EU with massive cookie banners everywhere (which is a good thing). Maybe I'm not in the target demographic anymore ;) but I can't believe advertisers don't see a dent in impressions. In fact, their continued reliance on targeted advertising makes me believe CTRs and other metrics are manufactured anyway. It's not like GOOG and FB figures can be verified independently.

dinoreic 6y ago

I assume readership base per particular publication is lower then before plus when in open market they get lower $ for x views then they used to.

jdietrich 6y ago

>Problem solved. Nope. Ad CPMs in the print era were an order of magnitude higher than today. All of the shady online advertising tactics are an effort to improve CPMs and eke out something resembling a functioning business model. Removing those tricks just means making less money, for businesses who are already barely surviving. Print newspapers used to cost 50c because of the classified section. Online news didn't kill the newspaper business - Craigslist, Zillow and Monster did.