Every once in a while a business of some kind approaches Indie Auto about running their content — which they would apparently be happy to pay for. Kind of like an ad, except mixed in with all of our other stories. Here’s a recent query:
“Hi there, We are working on a campaign for a reputed Car insurance client who is interested in doing a guest post collaboration on your website. The article will be well-written and according to your blog theme with a small brief about the client in the article. If you’re interested, please let me know your pricing for a guest post placement with a do-follow link. In case of any queries, do let me know.”
This is a new thing for me. When I entered the journalism field in the 1980s, there was generally a big wall between the editorial and business side of larger newspapers and magazines. If an advertiser wanted to publish an article, that was handled entirely by the business folks — and the resulting content was clearly labeled as advertising. A typical example was an automotive section in newspapers that included press materials from automakers.
Perhaps the biggest reason the wall between editorial and business is falling down is because traditional sources of ad revenue have recently been “monopolized” by Google and Facebook (Fu, 2021; Filloux, 2020). Auto buff publications that depend on ad revenue have been fighting over a shrinking piece of the pie.
In the end, money does actually matter
This is a long way of saying why I understand the urge to run paid content. Even a small website like Indie Auto costs money to keep online. Although readership has been steadily growing, that has not translated into an equivalent increase in reader donations. So while I am greatly appreciative of those who have been supportive, it isn’t covering basic costs . . . which are increasing. And now that I am retired, I am less able to subsidize Indie Auto. So eventually something will have to give.
All of which brings us back to paid content. Do you think that Indie Auto should run paid content? Or advertising in general? Or do you think the reader-supported model can be viable if given enough time and effort?
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Filloux, Frederic; 2020. “Did Google and Facebook kill the media revenue model?” Monday Note. Posted Dec. 7.
- Fu, Angela; 2021. “Report: Google and Facebook are responsible for depressed advertising revenue.” Poynter. Posted Jan. 12.
It’s sounds pretty much to me like you already know your answer. For me, on other websites I scroll past sponsored articles that are mixed in because they are different from original content in many ways. It is often annoying when it’s difficult to tell the difference, initially, which I suppose is their aim in order to get your attention.
Alan, I have my own sensibility, but I’d like to get a feel for where readers are at.
Advertising is bad enough when it’s obvious. It’s a necessary evil, I get that. I can accept a reasonable amount of advertising.
Advertising masquerading as “content” must be obliterated; and the promoters of advercontent thrown into the fire.
Am fine with it, Steve. Perhaps you can eventually be in a position to drive good advertising. After all, many of the images we enjoy on your website are… well, you know.
Am fine with it, Steve. Perhaps you can eventually be in a position to drive good advertising worth remembering. After all, many of the images we enjoy on your website are… well, you know.
If the cost of maintaining the site requires assistance beyond reader support, I’d think ads could be introduced. I have concerns about paid content, as some readers may confuse it with editorial. Indie Auto provides warts and all environment of insightful commentary and unvarnished facts and statistics which some paid content writers might find desirable to embed their messages within.
An ad is an ad and is recognized as such, paid content can become misleading if it is not clearly identified for what it is.
I’m with Schurkey and DRN.
An aside: it may be the right time to tell you that l’ve tried to donate to Indie – which routes me to Paypal. But l cannot complete the transaction (somehow blocked – it may be my anti-virous kicking it out, l don’t know). Is there some alternative way to get the job done?
Stewdi, thank you for bringing to my attention the Paypal problem. I don’t know why your transaction was blocked. If anyone else has that experience let me know.
I started to set up a Stripe account but got sidetracked. I will complete setting it up and let you all know when it is available.
I had the same problem when my attempted donation to another site got rerouted to PayPal, then apparently blocked (“…transaction cannot be completed…”). I’m using Firefox and BitDefender, both of which do a lot of cookie and tracker blocking. BTW I have no problem with ads as long as they’re not disguised as editorial. Synergistic ads compatible with editorial can be useful.
Doug, l got that message as well – and l also use BitDefender, but Google Chrome.
Yes, Steve please let us know when an alternative is available.
I believe if the advertiser is credible, like Coker Tire or Hagerty Insurance, etc., the type of advertisers that appear in Hemmings, for example, is perfect for the website, but only if the firewall between content is wide, tall and thick. “Indie Auto” is a forum that sources its facts and promotes a wide diversity of opinions without malice. Advertisers that provide good services to your readers is compatible with your website’s integrity.