Many sites, such as digital magazines, need to earn an income for the content they produce. Paywall or adverts - which is better/worse?
Tweet
Share
Share
Pin
Share
ShareTable of contents
How should a newspaper finance its activities?
It's easy to imagine what it was like in the old days. A newsagent would stand in the street and shout out that the latest news was on sale. You gave the vendor a coin, and you got your paper.
Over time, the range of newspapers and weekly magazines expanded, but people continued to pay for their physical copy, in a shop.
Then came the internet. Suddenly it became free of charge to read - apart from paying for a computer, electricity and internet, of course, but that didn't benefit the newspaper. So how would the newspapers make money? Well, adverts of course! And then: a paywall.
Pros and cons of the paywall
A paywall means that you only see a small part of a site for free, and then you have to pay to see and read the rest, for example in the form of a monthly subscription. Sometimes you have to pay for pretty much everything on the site, and other times there is a "premium section" for paying readers. Or you can read a certain number of articles before everything is locked...
In a way, a paywall can be reasonable. You pay for something you want to read, and at best it means you get to read your favourite newspaper without intrusive ads. On the other hand, it has become more and more common to see adverts behind the paywall as well, in so-called 'hybrid business models'.
A challenge for readers is that they may want to read many different newspapers and websites, and it becomes expensive to add up all the different subscription costs. A challenge for the newspaper (and advertisers) is that readership is declining, because of course not everyone is prepared to pay.
Advantages and disadvantages of adverts
If a site runs adverts instead (without a paywall), this may mean that there are more adverts, which may be perceived as disturbing to readers, especially if the adverts are 'flashing' or irrelevant.
On the other hand, the advantage of an ad-only site is that the reader does not have to pay anything to read. The advantage for the site owner (and advertisers) is that readership will be higher, as those who do not want to pay will not be scared away.
How do we think?
We understand the idea of a paywall and think it may be reasonable on some sites, especially large and well niched sites/newspapers that have a very loyal readership. However, we believe that most people are prepared to pay a subscription fee only on a limited number of sites, so if a very large number of sites are locked, we believe that people will read in fewer places.
For our part, we do not pay for any site at the moment. We read on so many different places, and if we hit a paywall, we usually google further and find the information elsewhere. That said, we may of course change our minds in the future, depending on how things develop.
As for our own magazine, we will (at least for the foreseeable future) continue to produce open content that is free to all readers, and funded by adverts. This is partly because we want our site to be open to all, and partly because we believe it is the most reasonable way for us to fund the site.
How do you think?
How do you think? Are you bothered by adverts? Do you subscribe to sites with a paywall?
You might also like:
English (UK) 
Svenska 
Deutsch 
Suomi 
Polski
Anna Nilsson Spets says:
So, I read Swedish newspapers online, usually the good reports are behind paywalls and really annoying when you can't read. And even more annoying is when you see links on the website that also lead to paywalls.
No, I'm not paying, do as you do, keep googling.
24 April 2024 - 6:18
Helena says:
Yes, the thing about links to articles that you can't read is quite sad ... agree!
27 April 2024 - 5:16
BP says:
Now I know what paywalls are. Have only "stumbled upon" them at DN, SvD and various newspapers. Very disturbing. However, I have a subscription to Aftonbladet with their plus service.
It is equally annoying with adverts on websites, especially mobile ones, which unfortunately you have also started with. Then the adverts are in the middle of scrolling text and you have to scroll past x number of times.
Your site has to produce two salaries, so I understand that you have to take in adverts to "survive", but it is disturbing.
24 April 2024 - 17:58
Helena says:
We can certainly understand that adverts are sometimes seen as distracting. We try to avoid adverts that flash, but we do have adverts that 'share' the same space and therefore shift, so I guess that's what you mean! And yes, we need them to pay our bills... We do our best to have as relevant adverts as possible, avoiding ones that pop up or scroll up and down and the like.
27 April 2024 - 5:20
Anonymous says:
Would never pay to read an article, I'll take the adverts ☺️
25 April 2024 - 11:50
Helena says:
Thank you for your point of view! We are reasoning alike, at least for now...
27 April 2024 - 5:25
Ditte says:
Interesting thoughts that I have also pondered. I don't want to pay to read and as you write, one can find the content anyway. And listening to the radio is perfect. You get a lot there.
As far as blogs are concerned, I have thought a lot about this with adverts and that the bloggers have been allowed to receive adverts without being in control. I get really worried when I see some dating adverts where young girls offer themselves to older men and this on some blogs that consider themselves "big". I guess it's a free platform or something, but in my opinion it's really distasteful to possibly make money on such things. If you have an advertising partnership, it should be stated, but this is what you sometimes get in return.
Agree with BP here that it is annoying with adverts that cut off the posts and they then feel less interesting to read. Would be better with adverts at the end.
25 April 2024 - 20:38
Helena says:
Thanks for your comments Ditte! Agree that it will be extra boring if you can not control the ads yourself, and that there will then be such ads that are not so nice ... This can be avoided by getting your own domain, but then you have to take some costs for web hosting etc. instead. We take in all ads manually, so we control ourselves which ads we post. Thank you also for your comments on ad placement! Full understanding of the views, while it is a trade-off to be able to pay the bills 😉
27 April 2024 - 5:32
Ditte says:
I fully understand you who have to live on what you do. And the fact that you can have adverts you choose yourself is good. But when some people have a blog and have to live on it and at the same time can't influence the ads, I think you lose in the long run. Few readers want to see ads with undressed pictures of young girls looking for older men - maybe you should invest in paying a couple of thousand a year to decide your own ads.
I know this is not really relevant, but speaking of adverts.
And with you I have not been bothered directly. The content of what you write and completely adequate adverts are a plus. And you must be able to make a living. Absolutely...
27 April 2024 - 14:28