Google
The web is funded by ads. But so many people hate seeing them, and they often resent all the data tracking that props them up. It’s a clash that has become a major pain point for news websites and other publishers. The rise of ad blockers, which let people surf the web without these annoying ads, is also blocking their revenue.
But Google is now offering a service that aims address both sides of this rather complicated issue.
Launched on Thursday, the service is called Google Contributor, and it asks you to pay $1, $2, or $3 a month to back the websites you particularly like. In exchange for your support, you’ll see “thank you” messages where ads used to be—at least on the websites that participate in the program. At the moment, Google is testing the idea with ten online publishers, including The Onion, ScienceDaily, Urban Dictionary, and Mashable.
The thank-you notes are served up through Google’s existing advertising channels, and Google still takes a cut of each contribution. According to Google, the $1 to $3 users pay essentially covers the cost of that ad space. But all of this is subject to change, she says, as the platform develops. “At this point, what we’ve rolled out is very much an experiment,” a Google spokesperson tells us. “We’re getting the publishers on board today. We’ll see not just how it works but also the public interest level.”
This type of thinking makes sense. If people are going to gripe constantly about ads and having their personal data sold to advertisers, why not ask them to put a nominal amount of money where their mouths are? Google Contributor tries to appeal to readers’ sense of ethics, urging them to believe that the content they enjoy is well worth spending $1 a month.
But this approach may be too little, far too late. People are already used to getting content online for free. As much as they hate ads and ad tracking, they hate paying for free stuff even more. It’s not unlike what happened to the music industry back in the early 2000s. Once people realized they could download music for free, the industry had to take legal action against companies like Napster in order to convince listeners to start paying again.
Now, easy and instant transactions through platforms like iTunes make the whole paying-for-music thing a little more palatable. What’s more, fans are even beginning to come down on the side of artists, when they feel music platforms are robbing them of their fair share. The Spotify-Taylor Swift fallout is only the most recent example.
The publishing industry is now finding itself at a similar crossroads, trying to convince the world that the articles and videos they’re consuming are actually worth something. But appealing to people’s ethical duty isn’t a surefire way of winning over the masses. That’s one reason why publishers like The New York Times, which has had moderate success with paywalls, have to charge a lot more than $1 a month for digital subscriptions. They count on the fact that some readers will do the cost-benefit analysis and decide that access to the Times isn’t worth the money, and that’s for one of the most highly respected publications on the web. Now imagine the challenge a publication like ScienceDaily would face if it started charging.
What’s more, Google says, Contributor won’t change the fact that people’s activity online will still be tracked, which is one of the primary reasons people hate ads in the first place.
Still, for all its potential drawbacks, Contributor could solve a lot of problems on the web today. It could save publishers who are struggling to stay afloat as ad dollars dwindle, while also giving consumers what they say they want. Now, we’ll have to see just how much they want it.
No comments:
Post a Comment