I don't share this way of thinking. If I enter a shop and they act with disrespect and do shady, annoying and often harmful things in order to earn a bit more, I don't feel compelled to provide them with a viable business model before expressing my disappointment.
I wonder: do you imply we should make an effort to help all struggling businesses we encounter all the time, or only the ones that do bad things?
Maybe a more direct question would be: Do you see any scenario where it is possible to pay writers to regularly write about interesting events or topics?
The reality may be "No, get another job journalists, the world does not value your contribution in any economically meaningful way."
Not necessarily, but newspapers play a useful role in our society so it's definitely worth saving/helping them, but this doesn't apply to all businesses.
I have actually two idea that might help transform from advertising:
- sponsored content (I know, it's still advertising, but better), like more PR articles and in depth interviews of product creators. that can't be easily blocked and has some value.
- transforming the brand focus to journalists instead of the main brand. For example I don't really know any New York Times journalists by name, I know a few from the tech sector, but also few. Medium did this in a way, but that's out of control because anyone can share any bullshit there. The solution should be in between, like people would say instead there's a great New York Times article, "John von Foo updated his page on the Times network". The design would also author focused and brands would act as a quality filter.
What about when you enter a shop, and they ask you to look at some harmless pictures and read some bits of text, in order to give you the goods cheaper, or for free?
I sometimes optimize for bullshit-avoidance over price. So if a shop does that, a different shop that doesn't do that, will probably become preferable. That's if their goods or services meet an important need, mind you. (Examples: it will feed my family, put clothes on my back, enable me to get around, etc.) If it's a frivolous discretionary good with low or arguably-negative value (e.g. "spending time reading internet articles") then "no transaction at all" (i.e. leaving the market without patronizing any vendor) might become preferable.
The last thing aggrandizers of their own words need to be doing is giving me any reason to remember how unnecessary they are to me.
That has indeed happened to me. Sometimes I've felt like complying with the kind request, others I've elected to decline.
In the latter cases, the moment they revealed that the option was not in fact optional, I left the shop out of indignation.
In the former, the harmless pictures and texts actually proved themselves harmless: if they didn't, if there were a history of harmless pictures that are really harmful, I would never ever accept to look at one again.
The question is, with the amount of advertising seemingly required to cover costs at this point, is it really a viable option? It is as if we only got rid of <blink> to have it now being replaced with doubleclick iframes and popups. We've made no progress.
While a different industry, Patreon and Twitch subscriptions seem to work for a lot of people. Although that usually involves only a single person at a time, it is probably at least worth considering to have this option as a content provider these days, as there is definite proof people are willing to pay for content they enjoy.
Even, or maybe especially, if they don't have to. It's a choice to help the creators they care about and enjoy. Not about buying themselves free from ads or whatever.
My personal opinion is that now would be a good time to go down that route.
Maybe the solution is to go towards social journalism instead of the old school way. Less large corporations paying professional writers (mostly from well off backgrounds), more of a Uber type deal where the average Joe signs up through some sort of mobile app and they report the news from their own locations.
Perhaps the corporate, 'professional' model of media is simply not viable. Maybe Patreon might work with this, with the future 'journalists' not being corporate employees, but freelancers paid by their fans and the public to report the news.
The uBlock counter in Safari hit 24... wow. Even with no ads the layout is ridiculously busy. Thank god for reader mode!
On a side note, the "but we deserve to get paid!" argument is quickly falling on deaf ears. Your company wants to control how my browser renders markup, the answer to which is a hearty GFYS. You want to place an ad or two to cover costs.. fine. You want to abuse my bandwidth, security, and attention? Nah.
