Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
California’s Journalism Preservation Act would do more harm than good. Here’s how the state might better help news
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
Oct. 1, 2015, 2:46 p.m.
Mobile & Apps
LINK: www.nytimes.com  ➚   |   Posted by: Justin Ellis   |   October 1, 2015

Two reminders on Thursday that publishers face an daunting battle against ad blocking technology. First, The New York Times released its analysis of homepage loading speeds for the top 50 mobile news sites, including CNN, The Guardian, The Washington Post, The Atlantic, Gawker, BuzzFeed, Elite Daily, and the Times itself.

Not surprisingly, there’s a sharp difference in how fast a site loads if the ads are blocked or not:

We measured the mix of advertising and editorial on the mobile home pages of the top 50 news websites — including ours — and found that more than half of all data came from ads and other content filtered by ad blockers.

Our neighbors across the Charles River at Boston.com performed the worst: 8.1 seconds to load editorial content and a whopping 30.8 seconds to load advertising. The Times estimates visiting the homepage of Boston.com once a day for a month would cost $9.50 in data usage on an average American cell plan. (Boston.com’s upscale sibling, BostonGlobe.com, took a more reasonable 1.8 seconds to load ads and 4.3 seconds for editorial.)

The Times’ tests are a good example of why many publishers are anxious about the long-term consequences of ad blocking on their business model.

Reactions to the analysis were mixed, with Boston.com taking its lumps for its poor performance, while others saw the tests as another wakeup call to media companies.

Meanwhile, my hometown newspaper, the Star Tribune, has introduced its own ad-blocking counter measure:

The Star Tribune joins other newspapers like The Washington Post in trying to find a way to keep ad blockers at bay by essentially denying readers entrance to the site. Others like The Atlantic and The Guardian give readers a gentle nudge to find other ways of supporting their journalism.

Needless to say, some readers of the Star Tribune were unhappy with the paper’s decision:

Show tags
 
Join the 60,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
California’s Journalism Preservation Act would do more harm than good. Here’s how the state might better help news
“If there are resources to be put to work, we must ask where those resources should come from, who should receive them, and on what basis they should be distributed.”
Dateline Totality: How local news outlets in the eclipse’s path are covering the covering
“Celestial events tend to draw highly engaged audiences, and this one is no exception.”
The conspiracy-loving Epoch Times is thinking about opening…a journalism school?
It would, um, “champion the same values of ‘truth and traditional’ as The Epoch Times” and, er, “nurture in the next generation of media professionals,” ahem, “the highest standards of personal integrity, fairness, and truth-seeking.”