I am sort of surprised that there’s no equivalent of “spotify for websites.” It’s easy for me to imagine a service offering an ad-supported and paid subscription that streams otherwise-paywalled websites to you, distributing the revenue as a fraction of clicks or something like that, and only displaying ads on the websites to the ad-supported tier of users. Is there some enormous technological or security hurdle that makes this much harder to do for streaming websites than for streaming music?
The big websites make more money by selling ads directly than by selling them over a federated system. If you pay the New York Times directly for your ads and the New York Times writes a story that annoys you, you can call the New York Times to complain. On the other hand, if the New York Times wouldn’t sell ads directly but instead use some federated ad system, ad buyers couldn’t do that.
We currently don’t really have bands you have their own homepage where you can listen to the music of the band and the band makes money with selling ads.
There’s Apple News+ that gives you one paid subscription and then allows you to access a bunch of otherwise-paywalled websites.
I am sort of surprised that there’s no equivalent of “spotify for websites.” It’s easy for me to imagine a service offering an ad-supported and paid subscription that streams otherwise-paywalled websites to you, distributing the revenue as a fraction of clicks or something like that, and only displaying ads on the websites to the ad-supported tier of users. Is there some enormous technological or security hurdle that makes this much harder to do for streaming websites than for streaming music?
The big websites make more money by selling ads directly than by selling them over a federated system. If you pay the New York Times directly for your ads and the New York Times writes a story that annoys you, you can call the New York Times to complain. On the other hand, if the New York Times wouldn’t sell ads directly but instead use some federated ad system, ad buyers couldn’t do that.
We currently don’t really have bands you have their own homepage where you can listen to the music of the band and the band makes money with selling ads.
There’s Apple News+ that gives you one paid subscription and then allows you to access a bunch of otherwise-paywalled websites.
Well, spotify isn’t profitable in the first place, for one.
No, but it and its competitors do somehow exist… Why isn’t there something similar for paywalled websites?