Facebook Is Now Testing Paywalls for Articles

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Facebook has started testing subscription support for Instant Articles. Two paywalled options are available for publishers to choose from: the first is a metered model where everyone gets to read 10 free stories per month before needing to subscribe, while the second is a freemium model where the publisher chooses which articles to lock.

When someone who isn’t a subscriber hits one of these paywalls, they will be promoted to subscribe for full access to the publisher’s content. One really interesting aspect – if you want to purchase a subscription Facebook will direct you to the publisher’s website to complete the transaction, meaning they process the payment directly and can keep 100% of the revenue and transaction data. The subscriptions will then also include access to the publisher’s full site, and existing subscribers can also authenticate within Instant Articles so they can get full access without paying twice.
 
NYT has been doing this for a long time. It’s not that hard to break it though.
 
Wired.com lost like 30% or 60% traffic when they started using anti-ad blockers and I still don't think they've recovered.

People don't pay for news. A magazine? Sure, maybe.

They can charge all they want for anything on Facebook as long as I don't get pop ups or sucked into ass-hat trickery / underhanded means.

And here is the thing most people don't know. Facebook makes an average of $16 or $17 per year off each of it's users. They do this various ways. One of course is selling your Facebook habits.

I'm skeptical of this news.
 
There's always a way to get around a paywall like a webpage archive site or using incognito mode.
 
I like the freemium model so the publisher's can put fakenews behind paywalls while leaving the real news free to access.
 
Very few people will pay, and it will destroy any publishers or journalist that implement it. That is not me being selfish and wanting it to fail that is me speaking from experience. I have seen site after site, and forum after forum try this for over 20 years and the solution is always the same, the customers go elsewhere, its the fastest way to kill a vibrant forum. This is why the advertising model is the only model that works. Freemium is fine but only in the sense that you pay to not have any ads, or get other perks. There is a portion of the population that will pay for that and you wont destroy your customer base.
 
FaceBook seem to falsely assume that people read the articles.

99.999...% of the time people read the headlines and form an opinion on just the few words of the headline itself. It's the same story on Twitter. This is how false news spread so easily. No one has any critical thought to read past the headline because by that point it's already deemed a credible source in their mind.

It happens on this forum all the time, too. Its universal. No one will ever see the paywall, lol.
 
Last edited:
Paying for Fake News filtered through a Liberal medium?

tumblr_lozdsb0bKx1qbnd1c.gif
 
This is the way the internet is going. Pay for everything. They don't need a new revenue stream, they need more revenue streams.

I'll continue to use "free" (ad supported, etc.) sites.

Of course, they could save some money on some of those sites by not using auto-play videos. They waste bandwidth and I'll either pause or mute them.
 
umeng2002 said:
Who the hell uses Facebook for news?
Click to expand...
For a great many, Facebook and YouTube are basically the internet now, with some Instagram and Twitter thrown in on the side, with Amazon for shopping.

The internet just seems so small now compared to what it used to be.
 
lulz. Paying for news. I have an app on my phone for Reuters news, it's the only thing I trust anymore for straight forward news without political bullshit commentary. They have some minor ad placements and they are very obviously ads, I don't mind supporting there. But stupid bias media outlets like NYT, Washington Post, etc? I might read an article, but only with my adblock on.
 
Cyraxx said:
lulz. Paying for news. I have an app on my phone for Reuters news, it's the only thing I trust anymore for straight forward news without political bullshit commentary. They have some minor ad placements and they are very obviously ads, I don't mind supporting there. But stupid bias media outlets like NYT, Washington Post, etc? I might read an article, but only with my adblock on.
Click to expand...

Careful what you say around here. Reuters is fake news. Fox News isn’t and neither is Drudge Report, Brietbart or Infowars. Neither is CNN, NPR, NYT, or the Washington Post. It’s all fake and all real all the time. Rule of thumb is, if they aren't exposing how our government is turning our frogs gay then it is fake news.

Remember, we’re being chem trailed into stupidity and we aren’t woke if we still think Reuters is real news.

The Earth is also flat and we’ve been lied to about ever being in space. I have proof, believe me. Unbelievable proof. The best proof. The Earth is flat, let me tell you. Flat as ever. Really flat. Not round but flat. I can prove it. It’s unbelievably flat. Very flat, and I’ve got evidence. The best evidence. The fake news just won't tell you about my great evidence. Sad!
 
Last edited:
Sonicks said:
Careful what you say around here. Reuters is fake news. Fox News isn’t and neither is Drudge Report, Brietbart or Infowars. Neither is CNN, NPR, NYT, or the Washington Post. It’s all fake and all real all the time. Rule of thumb is, if they aren't exposing how our government is turning our frogs gay then it is fake news.

Remember, we’re being chem trailed into stupidity and we aren’t woke if we still think Reuters is real news.

The Earth is also flat and we’ve been lied to about ever being in space. I have proof, believe me. Unbelievable proof. The best proof. The Earth is flat, let me tell you. Flat as ever. Really flat. Not round but flat. I can prove it. It’s unbelievably flat. Very flat, and I’ve got evidence. The best evidence. The fake news just won't tell you about my great evidence. Sad!
Click to expand...


... is that evidence "Yuuuuuuuge" ?
 
haste. said:
Because you trust fox news?! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You're damn right I do. A whole hell of alot more than those idiots on CNN & MSNBC. All they care about are Trump phone calls to the parents of killed veterans and how they can use that to smear him. It's disgusting. I could care less about the conversation between him and the parents, that's between them.

Do you see any other news Network reporting on the Uranium One deal? No, you dont. Why? Because it doesn't get "likes" or follow their agenda to disgrace the President.

Bottom line, the Liberal media (Including Facebook) are mad as hell that their candidate lost, and will stop at nothing to slander and disgrace Trump.
 
Last edited:
Smashing Young Man said:
For a great many, Facebook and YouTube are basically the internet now, with some Instagram and Twitter thrown in on the side, with Amazon for shopping.

The internet just seems so small now compared to what it used to be.
Click to expand...

Nah, it just means that the simple minded have adopted the use of it. No wonder all these insanities have happened in the history - the vast masses are drones not capable of real thinking.
 
How about if it's got a paywall, don't show it to me at all. Better yet, free or not, don't show it to me at all. I don't go to Facebook for news.
 
Now you too can pay for access to complete and utter, total bullshit articles about himalayan pink salt!
 
Krenum said:
You're damn right I do. A whole hell of alot more than those idiots on CNN & MSNBC. All they care about are Trump phone calls to the parents of killed veterans and how they can use that to smear him. It's disgusting. I could care less about the conversation between him and the parents, that's between them.

Do you see any other news Network reporting on the Uranium One deal? No, you dont. Why? Because it doesn't get "likes" or follow their agenda to disgrace the President.
Click to expand...

'Couldn't care less' - 'Could care less' means you do care, at least a bit, and that it is possible to care less than you currently do, thus negating the point you're trying to make.

And to be perfectly honest, I think Trump is doing a better job than any news network could possibly do in their wildest dreams to disgrace himself. I'm with you on CNN and MSNBC having an axe to grind, but so do Fox, just in the other direction. Both sides are smelly bogs of misinformation and wholly untrustworthy.
 
Sonicks said:
Careful what you say around here. Reuters is fake news. Fox News isn’t and neither is Drudge Report, Brietbart or Infowars. Neither is CNN, NPR, NYT, or the Washington Post. It’s all fake and all real all the time. Rule of thumb is, if they aren't exposing how our government is turning our frogs gay then it is fake news.

Remember, we’re being chem trailed into stupidity and we aren’t woke if we still think Reuters is real news.

The Earth is also flat and we’ve been lied to about ever being in space. I have proof, believe me. Unbelievable proof. The best proof. The Earth is flat, let me tell you. Flat as ever. Really flat. Not round but flat. I can prove it. It’s unbelievably flat. Very flat, and I’ve got evidence. The best evidence. The fake news just won't tell you about my great evidence. Sad!
Click to expand...
A lot of effort went into this post for 0 payoff. Sad!
 
Krenum said:
You're damn right I do. A whole hell of alot more than those idiots on CNN & MSNBC. All they care about are Trump phone calls to the parents of killed veterans and how they can use that to smear him. It's disgusting. I could care less about the conversation between him and the parents, that's between them.

Do you see any other news Network reporting on the Uranium One deal? No, you dont. Why? Because it doesn't get "likes" or follow their agenda to disgrace the President.
Click to expand...


Wow, exactly the type of response I'd expect from someone that watches Fox news. It's like you're regurgitating what they say you should think about news networks from the other side.... I miss all the honest non-fake reporting fox did while Obama was president. Definitely no sensational false disgusting bullshit coming from them at that point, right? Or was it only true then because you didn't support that candidate?

The point is, anyone getting their news from fox/cnn/any of the major 24/7 news networks is being fed single sided bullshit that fits their own beliefs, and makes them feel warm and fuzzy about hating the other side.....

Also, I didn't vote for the douche OR the turd sandwich during the election, since neither party presenting someone worth representing our country. We clearly chose the absolute worst of the 2 evils though, and will most likely be dealing with the consequences for a long time.
 
Biznatch said:
Also, I didn't vote for the douche OR the turd sandwich during the election, since neither party presenting someone worth representing our country. We clearly chose the absolute worst of the 2 evils though, and will most likely be dealing with the consequences for a long time.
Click to expand...

Neither did I. But we chose not to have another Clinton in office, and that's good enough for me.
 
Jim Kim said:
You mean the deal that was first exposed by the New York Times in 2015.
Also reported on by msnbc.
But keep spinning.
Click to expand...

Jim, that story has been out for years, since 2009 in fact. Yes, they reported it, have they talked about it since? no, not really. Because they'd rather make up stories about Russia hacking our election, rather than focusing on stories that really matter to the security of the country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top