Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
Is the future about one all-knowing AI or many? The new app Poe gets you ready to chat with them all
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
Oct. 21, 2016, noon
Business Models
LINK: www.ft.com  ➚   |   Posted by: Ricardo Bilton   |   October 21, 2016

Hope isn’t lost for media organizations trying to get readers to stop blocking their ads. Maybe all they have to do is ask.

In July, The Financial Times ran a 30-day experiment to see what it would take to get people to whitelist the site in their adblocking software. Fifteen thousand of its registered users were split into three groups, each of which had access restricted in different ways. One group, for example, was presented with FT stories that had some of their words removed, a metaphor for the share of revenue that comes from advertising. Other readers weren’t able to access the site at all unless they opted in to ads. Readers were also given a message: “We understand your decision to use an ad blocker. However, FT journalism takes time and funding…”

The Financial Times says readers responded well to the experiment. Forty-seven percent of those who had to read stories with missing words agreed to whitelist the site, while 69 percent of users barred from the site entirely agreed to let ads through. And 40 percent of those whose access wasn’t restricted at all opted out of blocking ads.

The experiment shows that, in many case, the most effective anti-adblocking technique is also the most simple: talking directly to readers. The relationship between media organizations and readers online operates via an implicit contract: Publishers offer readers content for free, and in exchange, readers see those publishers’ ads. Making that implicit contract more explicit reminds readers of that dynamic and encourages them to support the sites they read.

Other publishers have tried variations on the idea, erring on the site of politeness and perhaps even repentance. In a recent campaign, Wired acknowledged why its users want to run adblockers (“We get it: ads aren’t what you’re here for) but reminds readers that “ads help us keep the lights on.”

Beyond asking people to whitelist, Slate (“We noticed you’re using an ad blocker”) and The New York Times (“The best things in life aren’t free. You currently have an ad blocker installed”) have used the messages to encourage people to sign up for their paid products. The Atlantic has also recently applied this idea.

The success of the efforts “show that FT readers accept advertising as part of the reader/publisher value exchange,” argued Dominic Good, The Financial Times’ global advertising sales and strategy director, in a press release announcing the results of the newspaper’s experiment.

Show tags
 
Join the 60,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
Is the future about one all-knowing AI or many? The new app Poe gets you ready to chat with them all
Poe lets you use ChatGPT alongside a new rival named Claude — which seems to work better in important ways.
Google now wants to answer your questions without links and with AI. Where does that leave publishers?
A dozen years ago, Eric Schmidt forecast the AI pivot that’s playing out this week. And the questions it prompts — around the link economy, fair use, and aggregation — are more real than ever.
A journalistic lesson for an algorithmic age: Let the scientific method be your guide
“One of the best parts about using the scientific method as a guide is that it moves us beyond the endless debates about whether journalism is ‘fair’ or ‘objective.’ Rather than focus on fairness, it’s better to focus on what you know and what you don’t know.”