News Corp Australia to stop people using ad blockers from accessing sites
News Corp Australia is to prevent people using ad blockers from accessing digital content as it looks to fight back against readers who are circumventing adverts and “destroying” the media firm’s business model.
The publisher is to launch a trial where it will tell people who block ads they can only access content if they turn off the technology, a move adopted by several US publishers already.
News of the trial comes after media executives at the International News Media Association world congress urged the industry to take a harder line with ad blockers.
News Corp has done just that, although its managing director of metro and regional publishing, Damian Eales, acknowledged it must also improve the quality of its advertising and create a more user friendly experience.
Speaking to Mumbrella at the INMA forum in London, Eales said the trial will “test the impact” of blocking the blockers.
“We’ll say to users who have an ad blocker turned on that if you turn it off you can continue [to access content]. We need to describe that this is our business model, that this is how we fund our journalism,” he said.
Paid subscribers who use ad blocking technology will be exempt.
Eales described the problem as “significant” with an “increasing percentage” of visitors blocking ads.
The numbers blocking ads on mobile in particular is “growing pretty rapidly.
“To be clear, ad blocking is a significant issue and it’s one that as an industry and as individual companies we need to tackle,” he told Mumbrella.
“We are funded by a combination of ads and subscription and without that business model we can’t afford to provide this [journalistic] service,”
“The reality is that ad blocking is destroying a key aspect of our business model so we have got to face up to that challenge.”
However, Eales admitted it was not just ad blockers that need to be confronted. Ads themselves must be improved so consumers are less likely to bypass them.
“I think you’ve got to face up to this in couple of different ways,” he said. “One way is deal with the ad blocking and deal with the customers who are using ad blocking, but equally we need to recognise there must be better ways to create advertising that is more appealing to customers and more user friendly.”
Asked if many would heed the appeal and turn off the technology to access content, Eales said: “Some will and some won’t. We make no money out of them anyway, and we are not charity.
“You have to go into this knowing that you are going to lose some audience. But you are prepared to lose that audience because you weren’t monetising them in any way, shape or form.”
While no media firm wants to lose what could be a sizeable percentage of audience, the focus should be on monetising existing customers, he said.
“One of the trends…is that being big is no longer a differentiator,” Eales said. “The reality is that it’s about how you monetise that audience better.
“No one wants to lose, for example, 30% of your audience but the reality is there is a probably a bigger opportunity to monetise your existing audience, and to make a more engaging experience for existing customers, rather than to just worry about ad blocking.”
OK, then, won’t watch it. No skin off my nose.
User ID not verified.
It’s refreshing to see publishers admit that something needs to change, but blocking AdBlockers isn’t the solution.
The industry needs to wake up and stop relying on the obtrusive, low interaction banner-ads that we’ve grown to hate.
NewsCorp needs to take a leaf out of the NYTimes’s* book and work towards producing engaging and worthwhile sponsored-content.
Gone are the days where you can throw together a pretty picture, some flashy animation and bam – there’s your ad.
The users are damaged and untrusting of ads – only when the line between advertisement and content is blurred will you see significant engagement in your digital ads.
* https://contently.com/strategist/2015/03/27/why-the-new-york-times-sponsored-content-is-going-toe-to-toe-with-its-editorial/
User ID not verified.
Given that it is trivially easy to get around the paywalls on The Australian and other New’s Australian sites I don’t why they are all that worried.
The other other irony is that a lot of their RWNJ readers (subscribers and others) are paranoid about privacy, cookies and hate ads so they may be preventing access to some of their keenest readers.
User ID not verified.
Oh no! How will I get my Murdoch aligned news that is mostly pay walled anyway?
User ID not verified.
I’m pretty sure most people using adblockers will be quite happy to skip News sites.
User ID not verified.
Bypassing the paywall AND blocking the ads is another story.
User ID not verified.
For media companies – native content is the way forward, banners ad suck for everyone.
For advertisers focus on your won website, pushing out your own quality content and return to outdoor and cinema. Leave these rent seeking, muck raking, tax dodgers to wallow in their own audience bashing irrelevance.
User ID not verified.
And nothing of value was lost.
User ID not verified.
Usually find blocking Javascript on the sites blocking ad blockers stops them being able to block you. Next step is to fudge your browser user agent as a Google search bot, they tend not to get blocked and even give free access to some sites that have paywalls.
User ID not verified.
Really? How about responding to consumer preference and enabling prepaid/anonymous reading of their sites. Nobody wants News data-vultures reading over their shoulder.
This is a sad and panicky ‘solution’ to a problem of their own making.
User ID not verified.
News are doing this purely so they’re seen by advertisers to be doing something. Of course, publishers with scale can still reach any audience anyway and only charge when actual ads are served – that’s the side of the story not championed enough.
User ID not verified.
“Journalistic service” and “this is how we fund journalism”?? Not sure what he’s talking about. But somehow that photo convinces me.
User ID not verified.
Once upon a time there were three bears. Publisher Bear, Digital Bear and Marketing Bear. Publisher Bear sold many printed newspapers. Digital Bear showed these same newspapers online for free. Publisher Bear was making lots of money from printed newspapers so he decided it was all perfectly OK to give away Digital Bear’s newspapers for free as he was also making lots and lots of money from Marketing Bear’s flashy banner ads and page take-overs.
All three bears thought they had built a perfect money tree and everyone would live happily ever after.
The people were happy for a while as they all thought Digital Bear’s free newspapers were a great idea and stopped buying Publisher Bear’s printed newspapers. Publisher Bear got very grumpy and decided that the people should no longer get it for free. The people had to subscribe and he built giant Pay Walls just like a man called Donald plans for Mexico. But the people found ways to smash the Pay Walls and read them for free just as they did before.
Digital Bear really annoyed the people by putting up lots and lots of yucky ads that people hated seeing every time they read a newspaper. A nice man told them he would help them to make the ads magically disappear with Adblockers and the people were happy again. Free newspapers with no more annoying ads that weren’t very good anyway.
Publisher Bear blamed Digital Bear for not planting the right kind of money tree. Marketing Bear got very angry because people were not seeing his ads anymore and decided it was a waste of time spending money with Digital Bear.
Now Publishing Bear’s last hope to keep Marketing Bear happy is to stop the people using Adblockers and force the people to see ads again or they will not be able to see Digital Bear’s newspapers any more.
The moral of the story Boys and Girls is that you must listen and understand people and treat them with kindness and respect. If you force them to do something they won’t like you very much at all and they won’t live happily ever after. Good night Boys and Girls!
User ID not verified.
I don’t have an ad-blocker but I find blocking javascript blocks out many of the ads anyway.
User ID not verified.
Native content. Ha ha ha. What a joke. News is difficult enough to digest without the garbage maquerating as news written by an intern. When will advertisers wake up
User ID not verified.
Thank you News Corp!! No more of your garbage will be reaching my screen! Oh happy day. 🙂
User ID not verified.
Why not just use sourcepoint to keep the ads showing and keep the revenue.
User ID not verified.
Well, bye. 🙂
User ID not verified.
The best analysis ever. Thank you, storyteller!
But where is Goldilocks?
User ID not verified.
If they are concerned about privacy and cookies and hate ads, they may be RW but are hardly NJ.
User ID not verified.
M to Q: “Now Q, this one’s a bit dicey. The Yanks have come up with a device that makes information available to the whole world and will keep going even in the event of a nuclear war. We want you to put all our information on this device, but keep it closed to anyone short of the readies. But leave it open enough so that those who are short of the readies can still reach the information with a bit of dickering. At the same time we must be able to keep out anyone who has no interest in special extra information we want to put up about er, um, weight loss, ladies’ undergarments, insurance policies, and all that sort of tommyrot. And of course the whole idea is to make lots of lovely money. The whole thing has to be monetised, you know.”
Q to M: “So it’s now you see it, now you don’t?”
M to Q: “You see it only if you pay.”
Q to M: “Surely if it was the Yanks who came up with it, they would have thought of that?”
M to Q: “Well, they didn’t. So it’s up to you. Do get on with it, there’s good fellow.”
Q to self: “SPECTRE and the KGB chappies were simplicity itself compared to this. Perhaps it’s time I thought of retirement.”
User ID not verified.
Goldilocks was distracted by a news story about porridge and beds being just right but it turned to be some shonky native advertising. She doesn’t trust the three bears anymore!
User ID not verified.
Seems a strange world we live in where just because you don’t like the way something is presented, you choose to employ a means of getting around their rules to access their offering.
How it is ‘normal’ that you can just steal content seems a strange development. The equivalent of asking an agency to do your work for you, but not pay for it. Or a client giving away it’s product without having to exchange money.
Nice that sites see a need for an improvement of the experience, but odd that the internet seems a place where legality is voided because someone is ‘annoyed’ that they have to access content in the way the publisher desired.
If you don’t like it, build your own website in the means you want.
User ID not verified.
“How it is ‘normal’ that you can just steal content seems a strange development.”
It’s not so strange when you consider that media companies were so spooked during the dotcom boom that they posted most of their content free on the web while ALSO trying to sell it in printed form. This never made sense to me. But they did it, and so created a generation of people who expect to have that information for nothing, because that is how it has always been for them. The story of the three bears, above, says it all.
Leaving all that aside, this morning I tried to visit the Herald website on my phone. It appeared briefly, and then the whole screen was covered in a car advertisement. There was a Close button on the ad. When I pressed it, it did not close the ad but took me right away from the site I was trying to reach, to the ad proper.
When you are faced with that kind of thing, it is natural to respond with “All’s fair in love and war.” Not to mention that placing obstacles in the reader’s way is entirely self-defeating when there are so many alternatives freely available.
User ID not verified.
Goldilocks was really fcked off because some rotten scum hacked into her phone and listened to her voice mails
User ID not verified.
What exactly would we be missing out on if we are unable to access Noise Ltd?
User ID not verified.
The headline, edited for reality would read:
“News Corp Australia to spot people using ad blockers *they can detect* from accessing sites”
Also as mentioned above people who use ad blockers (aka people under the age of 80) don’t read Newscorp
User ID not verified.
Like many I had some sympathy for your view….but then you clogged my browser full of bordeline porn that at all my data.
User ID not verified.
what a shame, i’ll miss out on the out-of-date clickbait articles that the murdoch/fairfax offerings provide.
User ID not verified.
All news sites are full of lies and clickbait, so I’m not missing out on anything expect more bullsh!t. Also, Newscorp can DIAF.
User ID not verified.