Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Blocking text-ads, no revenue left for web-writers?

<< < (2/3) > >>

40hz:
Personally I wouldn't donate to a website because I liked a certain article, donationware works best for 'tools'. I don't think I can get paid for putting legitimate search results underneath a post, which would be a benefit to readers, which is a shame. Subscription services go against the nature of the web (hiding content from public). I wouldn't buy a mug just because i read a website. Maybe that means that it's just too hard for an individual to recoup their costs?
-justice (August 08, 2008, 04:16 AM)
--- End quote ---

FWIW I don't see subscriptions as going against the "nature" of the web. The web was based on a technology developed primarily to to provide for reliable military communications in the event of a nuclear attack. Hardly a lofty humanitarian goal. It was designed to be a tool (and toy) for academicians, military planners, and defense industry engineers. It was not originally intended to become a public communication utility. And despite what many people want to think, it isn't, nor was it ever, "free." All that infrastructure, all that code -  all that everything was bought and paid for by somebody.

And we're lucky most of us can get access to it for nowhere near what it cost to build it. The web is human history's finest example of squatter sovereignty. One day The People showed up and settled in - and nobody came along and kicked them out. Talk about a land grab!

But just because we can access the web for next to nothing doesn't mean that it is free. Not does it follow that everything that is up on the web should also be free. If somebody chooses to make their work available at no charge, more power to them. I've done a lot of that myself. And the rewards I received were worth it even though they wouldn't buy me a cup of coffee. But if somebody wants to sell what they produce, I have no problem with that either.

I believe a subscription model works. But only if a website is providing real information value.

Now if bloggers just want to discuss, there are plenty of places that will give them free space to park a soapbox. But I would suspect many, if not most, want a bit more than that.

I've never had a problem with paying for information. But I do object to being asked to pay for personal opinions, regurgitations of scraped content, snide comments, hipster jive, and jokes. For that I can go to the local pub. At least there I can get a Guinness while I'm listening to drivel. And I doubt I'm alone in that.

The sad truth is: talk is cheap. Always was. But information, that "difference that makes a difference," is worth something. And I'll gladly pay for it if I need it. Preferably by some sort of subscription since paying for info "by the slice" is more of a hassle than it's worth.

Unfortunately, "monetizing your blog" has become one of those memes that crops up with dismal regularity in all books with titles like: 101 Part-Time Careers that Can Net You a Cool Million in 30 Days. It's the stepchild of all those 900-number and newsletter marketing schemes we suffered through back in the 90's. And the public has gotten both wise and weary of that game.

So why don't people want to pay (via watching ads) for what the average blog has to say? I think the answer is fairly obvious: Most blogs aren't worth anything other than the time it takes to skim them. And IMHO, three quarters of them probably aren't even worth that.

However that leaves millions of bloggers without a possible revenue stream to support their writing so I am thinking what it can be replaced with.
--- End quote ---

Three words: original quality content. And a subscription option. If they truly like what you're doing, they will pay for you to continue. And if they won't, then the blog in question is just a classic case of vanity publishing - except now it's decked out in cyber drag!

Because despite what we like to think about how different the web is from everything else we've ever experienced, the same old rules for business still apply. And Darwin is inescapable.

J-Mac:
I don't really mind Google text ads, as long as there are a reasonable amount. I don't know who controls how many appear - Google or the account holder, but I have been to a few sites where there were just an unusual amount of Adsense ads.

I don't want to hurt blogs that I like, but I admit I have not whitelisted all in AdBlock Plus.  I just never thought about it, and no blogger - before today - has ever mentioned it that I have seen.

Jim

app103:
The problem is not the Adsense ads themselves on sites, but how some people display them. They are relying on a single type of ad, placing it in a rather obnoxious way, and it can be quite annoying. If used properly, Adsense works on the right type of sites, without having to resort to being obnoxious with them. It's the people that abuse the ads that are ruining it for everyone.

I have been playing around with various ads on my blogs and I have found there is 2 types of ads and 2 types of visitors, so figure out what kind of traffic you have and use the right ads.

1. Hit & run info seekers. They come mostly from search engines, mostly from Google, and they respond well to Google's own text based contextual ads. You only need a simple strip with a few ads in it across the top and bottom of each page they see...not a huge block that makes people have to scroll to get to the content.

2. Loyal repeat visitors that usually end up blind to Google's ads on your site and respond better to something like Project Wonderful's 125 square ads and the smaller buttons, which a great many blogs and web comics use to advertise on each other's sites. This ad program is mega cool because of the interesting advertisers.

And if you publish a webcomic, it is better than adsense, because Adsense can't contextually match an ad to your comic images (there is not enough text), and usually gives crappy ads nobody will click.

I use both on my blogs and sites, but I use Project Wonderful a bit more. Rather than it being pay-per-click, it's pay-per-day and you will get paid whatever someone has bid on your ad box, regardless of whether anyone clicks the ads or not. (and yes, you are allowed to click the ads on your own site, unlike Adsense) You also get a lot more control over who is advertising on your site. The program has a lot of advantages for both advertisers and publishers.

I wrote a blog post a few months ago about my experiences with Project Wonderful. Things have changed a bit since then, and I am now making more off of their ads than Adsense, on some sites. (like I said in the beginning, what type of traffic you have makes a big difference) The article will give you a good idea of what kinds of sites are using the service and what you can expect to show up in your ad boxes. (the sites mentioned all advertised on my programming ebooks site) There is also both Adsense and Project Wonderful ads on my blog, and you can compare them and see, as a visitor, which are more appealing to you if you are not seeking info, and if you were.

Something else I noticed, is that turning off javascript in your browser will kill most ads (adsense included), preventing them from appearing on pages, but Project Wonderful ads will still show up.

There is also a wordpress plugin that will allow you to control who sees ads and which ads they see, which means you can show Adsense to people coming to your site from Google searches, and something else to everyone else.

You can also use it keep your site ad free for people coming from Digg, StumbleUpon, and EntreCard, since those people never click and showing them ads will just damage your CTR and get you budget priced by some ad networks, and in some cases get you accused of "artificially inflating page impressions" and your account revoked.

mouser:
nice post app  :up: :up: :up:

J-Mac:
I wrote a blog post a few months ago about my experiences with Project Wonderful.
-app103 (August 09, 2008, 02:39 AM)
--- End quote ---

app,

When I open your blog post page I get a popup telling me that it is restricted and I have to sign in to "freethesaurus.com".  (See image below).  What is that?

[attach=#1][/attach]

Thanks!

Jim

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page