4 ms·

One more point: I predict in 2022 that sites stop allowing Google to index their content via bot. Paywall sites are going to ride that business model all the w

by efitz 5y ago

One more point: I predict in 2022 that sites stop allowing Google to index their content via bot. Paywall sites are going to ride that business model all the way down in flames.

tyingq 5y ago
You might see the other direction happen too. Surely Google understands the disappointment for their end users clicking a search result and landing on a teaser paywall article that has less content than the search snippet.
- hakfoo 5y ago
  ISTR that was seen as huge leverage for a long time. If people were hitting a hard paywall, Google tended to penalize the result. A lot of sites ended up with a looseness in the paywall basically to ensure people landing from a search result got "first page free" style visibility. I feel like the key is to realize the difference between "news" and "editorial" content. A lot of "news" is begging for a race to the bottom-- I can get the latest Covid numbers, sportsball score, or the fact a water main burst on 12th street from 5 local TV channels or two or three newspaper-format sites. You can't really compete by providing a premium product for those things. On the other hand, the editorial content-- the op/eds, the bespoke columns-- that's where you can justify a paywall.
BoiledCabbage 5y ago
> Paywall sites are going to ride that business model all the way down in flames. What's the alternate business model they're supposed to use?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- tshaddox 5y ago
  Why is it always the responsibility of everyone except the people running the business to come up with a business model for them?
  - s1artibartfast 5y ago
    It is both. Surely the business are responsible for coming up with a model. Similarly the community is responsible for setting rules so that community members have their needs met. You can ban sandwich shops in your city, and there wont be a viable model for sandwich shops.
    - kittywav 5y ago
      > You can ban sandwich shops in your city, and there wont be a viable model for sandwich shops. No one banned sandwich shops (or paywalled newspapers) in this context, though. The problem is that some "sandwich shops" wants to give out free samples (i.e. keeping paywall open for bots and other clients that don't run js), because they know it's good for business, and then complain that people are taking free samples. Well... if this "handing out free samples" approach is not working out for them, it is up to them (and not everyone else) to figure out something that works for them. If not enough people are willing to pay full-price for their (I assume) high-quality sandwhiches, and much rather source their sandwhiches from somewhere else (if there are no free samples to be had), that's not anyone's problem but their own. You're making it seem like there is some regulamentory issue that prevents them from having/deploying a successful business model, when that's not the case: the problem is something else.
      - s1artibartfast 5y ago
        I agree that regulation was a bad example. I think a more accurate example is that consumers want high quality content, but dont want to pay and don't want advertising either. Consumers saying come up with a business plan that gives me want for free in return for nothing are in for disappointment
        kittywav 5y ago
        I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying. But, when the price of ignoring the problem for the consumer is "disappointment", rather than "bankrupcy", it still seems to me that it is not consumers that should be particularly worried.
jimpix45 5y ago
Do you think they'll do it manually or just not allow their pages to be indexed? That doesn't seem like something a publisher would want to do / happen as I'm sure a lot of their traffic comes from search.

by efitz 5y ago

One more point: I predict in 2022 that sites stop allowing Google to index their content via bot. Paywall sites are going to ride that business model all the way down in flames.

tyingq 5y ago

You might see the other direction happen too. Surely Google understands the disappointment for their end users clicking a search result and landing on a teaser paywall article that has less content than the search snippet.

hakfoo 5y ago
ISTR that was seen as huge leverage for a long time. If people were hitting a hard paywall, Google tended to penalize the result. A lot of sites ended up with a looseness in the paywall basically to ensure people landing from a search result got "first page free" style visibility. I feel like the key is to realize the difference between "news" and "editorial" content. A lot of "news" is begging for a race to the bottom-- I can get the latest Covid numbers, sportsball score, or the fact a water main burst on 12th street from 5 local TV channels or two or three newspaper-format sites. You can't really compete by providing a premium product for those things. On the other hand, the editorial content-- the op/eds, the bespoke columns-- that's where you can justify a paywall.

BoiledCabbage 5y ago

> Paywall sites are going to ride that business model all the way down in flames. What's the alternate business model they're supposed to use?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tshaddox 5y ago
Why is it always the responsibility of everyone except the people running the business to come up with a business model for them?
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  It is both. Surely the business are responsible for coming up with a model. Similarly the community is responsible for setting rules so that community members have their needs met. You can ban sandwich shops in your city, and there wont be a viable model for sandwich shops.
  - kittywav 5y ago
    > You can ban sandwich shops in your city, and there wont be a viable model for sandwich shops. No one banned sandwich shops (or paywalled newspapers) in this context, though. The problem is that some "sandwich shops" wants to give out free samples (i.e. keeping paywall open for bots and other clients that don't run js), because they know it's good for business, and then complain that people are taking free samples. Well... if this "handing out free samples" approach is not working out for them, it is up to them (and not everyone else) to figure out something that works for them. If not enough people are willing to pay full-price for their (I assume) high-quality sandwhiches, and much rather source their sandwhiches from somewhere else (if there are no free samples to be had), that's not anyone's problem but their own. You're making it seem like there is some regulamentory issue that prevents them from having/deploying a successful business model, when that's not the case: the problem is something else.
    - s1artibartfast 5y ago
      I agree that regulation was a bad example. I think a more accurate example is that consumers want high quality content, but dont want to pay and don't want advertising either. Consumers saying come up with a business plan that gives me want for free in return for nothing are in for disappointment
      - kittywav 5y ago
        I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying. But, when the price of ignoring the problem for the consumer is "disappointment", rather than "bankrupcy", it still seems to me that it is not consumers that should be particularly worried.

jimpix45 5y ago

Do you think they'll do it manually or just not allow their pages to be indexed? That doesn't seem like something a publisher would want to do / happen as I'm sure a lot of their traffic comes from search.