Report Reveals Apple News Brings Publishers Much Higher Traffic But a Lot Less Ad Revenue

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
48,664
10,087



An extensive new report by Slate has revealed the challenges publishers are facing when it comes to profiting from Apple News despite the platform's growing readership.

According to the report, page views on Apple News have roughly tripled since September 2017, and the app has now surpassed Facebook as a driver of readership.


Unlike Google and Facebook however, Apple News hosts content within the app instead of sending readers to the original website, depriving publishers of ad revenue.

In a stark example, Slate revealed that it earns more money from an article that gets 50,000 page views on its own site than it does from 54 million views on Apple News.

Apple News has so far offered publishers few opportunities for generating ad revenue, although Apple recently added support for Google's industry standard ad-serving tool DoubleClick.

Still, Apple's privacy policy ensures limitations: Google's ad manager can serve traditional banner ads including animated GIF ads, but it can't yet be used to serve HTML5-based ads or pre-roll video ads.

Despite the struggle, publishers are reportedly continuing to embrace Apple News in the hope that things will eventually change and given the huge potential opportunities for exposure that the platform offers. The app now comes pre-installed on all new Macs and iOS devices in countries where Apple News is available.

Apple has also reportedly urged major U.S. newspapers about adding their content to the Texture magazine app that Apple purchased in March, with a view to eventually integrating the subscription-based service into Apple News.

Article Link: Report Reveals Apple News Brings Publishers Much Higher Traffic But a Lot Less Ad Revenue
 

elpamyelhsa

macrumors member
Nov 22, 2010
95
23
Geraldton, Western Australia
News sites figured out how to monetise viewership by employing things like moving adverts that get accidentally clicked and forced pre-roll videos that steal our time. Now they are unhappy people are changing the way they read news to avoid these annoying things.

I feel sorry they are loosing money from this, they do need to make money after all, but on the positive side this may lead to more moral revenue paths for them.
 

Sefstah

macrumors 6502a
Dec 21, 2015
589
1,066
The news app would be nothing without the articles. Apple needs to step up and pay the publishers what they deserve.
500k views earns more than 54 million views?! Come on Apple!
 

redneckitengineer

macrumors 6502
Oct 27, 2017
409
927
Tennessee
The news app would be nothing without the articles. Apple needs to step up and pay the publishers what they deserve.
500k views earns more than 54 million views?! Come on Apple!
The difference here is how ads are presented.

AppleNews:
1. Banner only
2. Hard to accidentally click

Direct website:
1. Higher quantity of ads
2. Full screen unavoidable ads
3. Scrolling ads
4. Cross site tracking
5. Auto play video ads
6. Deceiving layout to encourage accidental clicking on ads disguised as fake news articles

It’s not about the ads, it’s how they present them and force them upon the user as to why they aren’t making enough.
 
Last edited:

0815

macrumors 68000
Jul 9, 2010
1,739
791
here and there but not over there
I stopped visiting (news) sites with in-your-face-ads (or read them through alternate means like apple news that are less annoying with ads). I don’t mind good old banner ads, but that garbage where one wrong mouse move (without click) blows that animated add up to almost full screen is unacceptable.

I refuse to use adblockers, because I think thats also wrong (Thats my choice, I know other think they are entitled to everything for free)

If it is the publishers thinking they can only survive by having annoying ads that distract the reader then this is their choice and it is my choice to pay them back by not visiting their pages anymore. I would stay if they would have less annoying ones.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Marekul

Christoffee

macrumors 6502
Jul 26, 2012
360
481
UK
Just use Adblock, like 1BlockerX. Surf the websites ad-free. I’m sorry but banner ads are about all I can stand. The stupid rolling ads, and the full page ads are a nuisance. Vote with your wallet, block them until they get reasonable.
I was all against adblockers, sympathetic to the cause. Then I got a nasty piece of adware on my Mac. Easily removed, but the the narrative said that it comes down with adverts. So, the baby went out with the bath water and I now adblock.
 

kstotlani

macrumors 6502a
Oct 27, 2006
578
748
It’s a dilemma. On one hand you would want fair and balanced news or big corporations are the only way news agencies can survive. The other side is we don’t want annoying ads clogging our experience. I would go for annoying ads if it will get me better journalism.
 

OldSchoolMacGuy

Suspended
Jul 10, 2008
4,197
9,050
Just use Adblock, like 1BlockerX. Surf the websites ad-free. I’m sorry but banner ads are about all I can stand. The stupid rolling ads, and the full page ads are a nuisance. Vote with your wallet, block them until they get reasonable.
It's sure horrid the websites you enjoy great content from would want to make money for their hard work. I get that you might hate ads but this is how they pay the bills. Don't be surprised if they shut down or start charging a subscription. You expect to get paid for the work you do at your job, they do too.

Block them until they get reasonable? Really? You think showing a few unobtrusive ads isn't reasonable? What would you consider reasonable (keeping in mind that they need to be able to make enough to justify putting in the time and effort to create this content)?
 

Fynd

macrumors 6502
Aug 11, 2010
427
234
Still waiting in Canada. It's been years. The widget exists, and promotes Canadian news (CBC and the like) yet still no app. Sigh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cgaw23

alexgowers

macrumors 65816
Jun 3, 2012
1,334
886
This is why niche extreme views and angles on these larger sites are so popular. If you get 50k clicks from outrage alone you make bank compared to genuine news articles that reign in the hyperbole.

Most of the ways these mainstream media sites advertise is horrific, with fake articles, popups, banners and blocking adblockers. They want people to click on ads and not read articles. Apple News while not perfect is trying to strip out those click bait techniques but it does also need to find a way to pay back.

It's annoying in this day and age that cheap click bait techniques both work and are profitable. From the advertisers perspective they are also getting ripped off and also ripping off everyone else. It's similar to the youtube AD issues, where adverts for coke were running on racist videos. The advertisers and the ad suppliers need to help clean up the news and stop ads supporting click bait behaviour. But if it was that easy it'd have been done, the problem is complex but solvable.
 

redneckitengineer

macrumors 6502
Oct 27, 2017
409
927
Tennessee
It's sure horrid the websites you enjoy great content from would want to make money for their hard work. I get that you might hate ads but this is how they pay the bills. Don't be surprised if they shut down or start charging a subscription. You expect to get paid for the work you do at your job, they do too.

Block them until they get reasonable? Really? You think showing a few unobtrusive ads isn't reasonable? What would you consider reasonable (keeping in mind that they need to be able to make enough to justify putting in the time and effort to create this content)?
What an entitled point of view.
I take it you both work in media? Because that’s the ONLY person who willingly accepts badgering, nuisance, invasive and tracking advertisements. I guess you totally missed what I said. Let me try and make it easier for you to understand a second time. I said that I accept banner ads. I do not accept bandwidth heavy auto play videos, ads that force me to click off them, scrolling ads that impede my ability to read the article.

If that makes me entitled, so be it. Forbes and NYT paywall.. I just go elsewhere now. By forcing them to lose revenue on adblockers, they are learning what types of ads were are willing to accept.
 

justperry

macrumors G4
Aug 10, 2007
10,603
6,094
I'm a rolling stone.
snip....I feel sorry they are loosing money from this, they do need to make money after all, but on the positive side this may lead to more moral revenue paths for them..../snip
Nah, I don't think will, except when they start to loose lots of money.
I don't have a problem with normal adds, as long there aren't too many, non moving, no videos.

Here where I live you have the choice to put a sticker on your mailbox so you don't get advertisements or non addressed mail, it works 99.9% of the time, no more full boxes of paper waste, something similar should be in place for the internet, how, don't know, maybe pay a yearly fee.
 

thisisnotmyname

macrumors 68020
Oct 22, 2014
2,340
4,875
known but velocity indeterminate
It's sure horrid the websites you enjoy great content from would want to make money for their hard work. I get that you might hate ads but this is how they pay the bills. Don't be surprised if they shut down or start charging a subscription. You expect to get paid for the work you do at your job, they do too.

Block them until they get reasonable? Really? You think showing a few unobtrusive ads isn't reasonable? What would you consider reasonable (keeping in mind that they need to be able to make enough to justify putting in the time and effort to create this content)?
I have no problem paying a subscription for quality news (e.g. I subscribe to the Times among others) but when someone's glorified blog pops full screen video ads and the very real danger of malware delivered from ad networks I'll use blockers on my browsers and Apple News to receive my news.
 

xWhiplash

macrumors 68020
Oct 21, 2009
2,013
1,055
I take it you both work in media? Because that’s the ONLY person who willingly accepts badgering, nuisance, invasive and tracking advertisements. I guess you totally missed what I said. Let me try and make it easier for you to understand a second time. I said that I accept banner ads. I do not accept bandwidth heavy auto play videos, ads that force me to click off them, scrolling ads that impede my ability to read the article.

If that makes me entitled, so be it. Forbes and NYT paywall.. I just go elsewhere now. By forcing them to lose revenue on adblockers, they are learning what types of ads were are willing to accept.
Not to mention some sites have so many ads when you view it on your phone, you can only view two sentences without clicking something to close or just waiting a few minutes for it to disappear on its own.

Also, it has become a huge security concern lately. I only visit a few websites and like the content, but a few malicious ads got through and caused some issues on my Windows computer. A company loses the right to get paid by me visiting with their ads if it causes my computer to become infected. I am sorry, I draw the line there. And it has happened multiple times on a few legit websites. So I use an ad-blocker.
 

TallManNY

macrumors 601
Nov 5, 2007
4,347
1,202
This seems almost as likely to be a viable business models for publishers as putting their content on Facebook. In other words, this isn't going to work unless the articles are just portions with the rest of the article behind a paywall. The top media sources should use a paywall and folks should pay it because a free and strong press is important for our Democracy.
 

OldSchoolMacGuy

Suspended
Jul 10, 2008
4,197
9,050
I take it you both work in media? Because that’s the ONLY person who willingly accepts badgering, nuisance, invasive and tracking advertisements. I guess you totally missed what I said. Let me try and make it easier for you to understand a second time. I said that I accept banner ads. I do not accept bandwidth heavy auto play videos, ads that force me to click off them, scrolling ads that impede my ability to read the article.

If that makes me entitled, so be it. Forbes and NYT paywall.. I just go elsewhere now. By forcing them to lose revenue on adblockers, they are learning what types of ads were are willing to accept.
So you're saying that you whitelist sites like this one for instance from your ad blocker? You do into every site with the blocker turned off and only enable it for that site if you find that the ads are intrusive?
[doublepost=1537962853][/doublepost]
This seems almost as likely to be a viable business models for publishers as putting their content on Facebook. In other words, this isn't going to work unless the articles are just portions with the rest of the article behind a paywall. The top media sources should use a paywall and folks should pay it because a free and strong press is important for our Democracy.
Publishers have to opt into Apple News in the same way they opt to put their stories on Facebook Instant Articles.

When doing so, they need to make adjustments for the new medium. This means inserting ads that are supported by the platform.

I publish my content to both Apple News and Facebook Instant Articles. On my normal website, Google Ads show on the left side column. When you publish to Apple News and Facebook, this aren't present. So in my code submission to them, the ads are instead inserted in-line with the article, placed between column at H2 breaks. This can be setup fairly easily to be done automatically during article submission to either platform before pushing it to their API or it can even be inserted manually when the publisher pushes the article.

In both cases, it's really up to the publisher to understand the limitations of these platforms, decide if they want their content seen there (do you want these large additional potential audiences or not), and is the change of revenue model (from what they may enjoy on their own website) worth the tradeoff.
 

Drzed

macrumors member
Oct 25, 2009
43
20
The day I see adds (double-click-adds from Google) on Apple news I am a goner.
Do you guys not get ads in your Apple News in your region???

I’m in Australia and Apple has had GIANT ads sprinkled among stories you read inside Apple News for many months now. I suspect they haven’t turned on the “feature” in North America yet. Not only are they plastering huge ads inside the story, but they automatically playing video ads!! Thankfully no audio though.

Apple News app was enjoyable to use in the past before they started inserting this large video ads. Ironically even the Google News app hasn’t resorted to such large advertising inside it..
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.