iOS 9's News app grows to 50 publishers amid Safari ad blocking worries

Posted:
in iPhone edited September 2015
When its News app launches this fall alongside iOS 9, Apple will have over 50 publishing partners on board, a report revealed on Wednesday.




That's up from 18 when the app was announced this June, Apple informed Re/code. The company hasn't released a full list of publishers, but some previously-confirmed names include the New York Times, The Guardian, ESPN, and The Atlantic.

Publishers are allegedly interested in News for several reasons, one being a policy that they will get to keep all revenue for the ads they sell, and 70 percent for any backfill spots sold by Apple.

Analytics firm Comscore will also be able to track News article views, essential data for publishers wanting to sell ads.

At the same time, News will reportedly provide a haven from iOS 9's content-blocker support. People who install blockers will be able to remove most or all ads from Safari, which has caused concern that ad revenues could drop still further in a market already hurting from desktop ad-blockers.

Both iOS 9 and News will probably launch in mid-September. Apple typically releases a new version of iOS ahead of new iPhones, which this year are expected to be shown at Sept. 9 event and ship on the 18th.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 36

    Ad blockers sound great, but how will non-subscription content-providers pay for their services..? 

  • Reply 2 of 36
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gregq View Post

     

    Ad blockers sound great, but how will non-subscription content-providers pay for their services..? 


    By using a small number of well designed ads that are not annoying enough for people to install ad blockers.

    The only reason I've installed ad blockers is because the ads get in the way of my content or divert my attention! If they don't then most people won't bother... Its the flashy annoying crap that caused the ad blocking explosion.

     

    I would imagine that most people agree with this.

  • Reply 3 of 36

    Hahahah....too bad Google. Very smart move by Apple.

  • Reply 4 of 36
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,748member
    krreagan wrote: »
    By using a small number of well designed ads that are not annoying enough for people to install ad blockers.
    The only reason I've installed ad blockers is because the ads get in the way of my content or divert my attention! If they don't then most people won't bother... Its the flashy annoying crap that caused the ad blocking explosion.

    I would imagine that most people agree with this.
    FWIW even Google recognizes some of the advertisers are annoying. They've started blocking those full-page flash ads and in the next few weeks start down-ranking websites that insist on throwing up full-page ads for their mobile apps. Looking for those those tiny little X's and then tapping in just the right spot to dismiss them so the content is viewable doesn't make for a good experience.

    So where does all this lead? Not to an internet without ads. Apple will still show them too.

    Look for native ads, unaffected by ad blockers, coming soon to a page near you. Higher mobile ad prices too 'cause companies ain't gonna stop promoting.
  • Reply 5 of 36
    krreagan wrote: »
    gregq wrote: »
     
    Ad blockers sound great, but how will non-subscription content-providers pay for their services..? 
    By using a small number of well designed ads that are not annoying enough for people to install ad blockers.
    The only reason I've installed ad blockers is because the ads get in the way of my content or divert my attention! If they don't then most people won't bother... Its the flashy annoying crap that caused the ad blocking explosion.

    I would imagine that most people agree with this.

    I agree. I don't think companies, like Apple Insider, don't realize how annoying it is to come to their site only to have Samsung ads shoved in ones face... Hello??? I have to wait for Samsung ads to load so I can read the Apple rumors... no thanks.

    incidentally, I PAY for the AI app for iOS. No ads, but then I can't read (too tiny) the comments, nor can I post on the iOS app. One step forward and two steps back!
  • Reply 6 of 36
    So am I right in understanding that content in the News app WILL show ads, whereas content in Safari will NOT (if you install an ad-blocker)?

    Won't that encourage people to avoid the News app?

    Or maybe I misunderstood this...
  • Reply 7 of 36
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,589member
    Bye bye my.yahoo!
  • Reply 8 of 36
    I agree. I don't think companies, like Apple Insider, don't realize how annoying it is to come to their site only to have Samsung ads shoved in ones face... Hello??? I have to wait for Samsung ads to load so I can read the Apple rumors... no thanks.

    yep, AI has a horrible, horrible homepage design -- more ads and non-content than content. itll be the first site that gets the content blocker for me. ironic.
  • Reply 9 of 36
    Hahahah....too bad Google. Very smart move by Apple.

    Google is getting hit on both ends by Apple. Apple's making it harder to get ads through to the Apple-users and harder to pin-point the iOS user via search terms. Finally, Apple is making it possible for Mac users to do more searching via Spotlight, which pulls more searching away from Google.

    Yeah, Google, how's that Android idea working out for you?
  • Reply 10 of 36
    slprescott wrote: »
    So am I right in understanding that content in the News app WILL show ads, whereas content in Safari will NOT (if you install an ad-blocker)?

    Won't that encourage people to avoid the News app?

    Or maybe I misunderstood this...

    We'll need to wait and see how everything works out, but my feeling is Apple's News app will not carry the kinds of ads that eat up data and annoy the users with dancing cockroaches and other animated crap designed to catch attention.
  • Reply 11 of 36
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gregq View Post

     

    Ad blockers sound great, but how will non-subscription content-providers pay for their services..? 


    I'm not letting myself get guilted about ad blockers. When a 700k page bloats out to 10 megs because of adware and trackers, the site is in actuality stealing from me by sucking up my limited data allotment.

    My responsibility is to my pocketbook, not theirs.

  • Reply 12 of 36
    imt1imt1 Posts: 87member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slprescott View Post



    So am I right in understanding that content in the News app WILL show ads, whereas content in Safari will NOT (if you install an ad-blocker)?



    Won't that encourage people to avoid the News app?



    Or maybe I misunderstood this...



    Well Yes and No.   I believe the end goal is two fold. 

     

    1) The Ad Blockers make for a better experience for all of those surfing the web. Pages will load much faster and Data usage should then be lower.  

     

    2) The News App will make for a much richer experience for delivering news content. News will still be Ad driven, like it always has. 

     

    So Why will people go to the News App vs. just going to a News Website and with ad Blocker seeing no Ad's? The reason is those sites will probably no longer exist or will only exist behind a paywall, where you can see the content with no ads if you pay. If they can;t get Ad revenue, cause the ad's are blocked,  then what is the point of keeping them going. Apple is giving those sites an out by creating the News App. The difference here is the News App will be a richer experience then you will get on a typical news site.  I'd bet that since Apple is behind the structure, the Ad's won't be annoying, the pages and content will load quickly and it won't kill your data plan with all kinds of trackers like you find on other news sites.  So like a win win.

  • Reply 13 of 36
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Ad blocking is probably one feature that Google will not copy.

  • Reply 14 of 36
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,158member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gregq View Post

     

    Ad blockers sound great, but how will non-subscription content-providers pay for their services..? 




    They won’t. They will cease to exist. How much would you pay per month to access and post on AppleInsider? Many web site developers have tried asking for voluntary donations over the years with dismal results.

  • Reply 15 of 36
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,158member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy View Post





    yep, AI has a horrible, horrible homepage design -- more ads and non-content than content. itll be the first site that gets the content blocker for me. ironic.



    Again, how much would you be willing to pay for access and posting to AppleInsider? $10/month? How much do you think it costs to keep AppleInsider online 24/7/365? How many subscribers would it require to stay in business if its ads are blocked and advertisers stop paying?

     

    None of you pro ad blocker types will answer. Why?

  • Reply 16 of 36
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,135member
    So what did I get out of this? Well that I should just use Safari to get my news because I can block all the ad's. If I use Apples NEWS reader, I'll be flooded by Ad's from them and Apple. Ummmm, Seems like a simple choice to me, Safari it is.
  • Reply 17 of 36
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,135member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy View Post





    yep, AI has a horrible, horrible homepage design -- more ads and non-content than content. itll be the first site that gets the content blocker for me. ironic.

     

    What I'm seeing here at AI is Ad wise is the same crap that slows down web pages from loading because of all the CRAP.  For AI, I see them using Amazon Associates,  DoubleClick, QuantCast, and VigLink and that's just the advertisers, not to mention all the other crap.  This Web site is on the low end of crap being dished out to you.  Install Ghostery into your browser and see for yourself.   

    https://www.ghostery.com/en/

     

    You can temp or Permanently allow things to get threw on whatever web site you go do.  For example if you want to maybe see or post a message, you may wan to to let that service work.   You can see how much it blocks on your task bar.  Mine is showing 9 things being blocked right now.  4 of them are advertisers.  I'm a fan of it.   Check it out.

  • Reply 18 of 36
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,135member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

     



    Again, how much would you be willing to pay for access and posting to AppleInsider? $10/month? How much do you think it costs to keep AppleInsider online 24/7/365? How many subscribers would it require to stay in business if its ads are blocked and advertisers stop paying?

     

    None of you pro ad blocker types will answer. Why?


     

    Really $10 a month.  So even more then the $7.99 a month I pay for Netflix to watch Commercial FREE Movies and TV programs?  $120 a year for AI?  That right there is crazy talk.  I won't even pay $9.99 a month for Apple Music.  It's way to much money for as as much as I would use it for.   On the other hand I would have a problem with $12 a year for AI.  To me for a BLOG which really has most of the same stuff and a 100 others that are free, even that?!?!  $10 is just silly talk and completely unrealistic.    

     

    Hey, I've donated to FREE software in the past.  In fact a couple times to one program I use daily that's WELL WORTH IT!!!  It's web sites that brought all these Ad blockers onto them.  Forcing tons of ad's down our throats.  Full page pop up's you can't seem to exit from.  Lots of ad's and a tiny bit of content.  it's completely ridiculous and out of control.   Some places I no longer go to.   Then on your Mobile device where Data costs you money, HELL NO.  I'm really getting sick of Pull page Ad's on my iphone and then having to wait before a tiny x pops on the screen I can barley see, or bringing be directly to their App in the App store.  HELL NO.  I refuse to buy anything doing that to me.  Nothing makes me more MAD then seeing a Ad for something I looked at on Amazon and wasn't going to buy and there it is at 3-4 other places I go to.  I 100% refuse to look or buy at that point also.   Doing that guarantee's a lost sale.

     

    I don't mind coming here and seeing the Ad's they have for Apple Mac's and whatnot.  I'm fine with that.  

  • Reply 19 of 36
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slprescott View Post



    So am I right in understanding that content in the News app WILL show ads, whereas content in Safari will NOT (if you install an ad-blocker)?



    Won't that encourage people to avoid the News app?



    Or maybe I misunderstood this...

     

    If you pay a subscription, you don'T get a ads (like the New York Times).

    What will happen is that major news sites will no longer offer a Web ad supported version,

    they'll limit its exposure to Google just a teaser paragraph and title.

    Everyone who wants news from a major ad driven news site will have to download and app for it.

     

     

    People who think blocking ads is swell will end up having to see all those same ads anyway to get their content (or not get it).

    There is no free lunch.

  • Reply 20 of 36
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    lkrupp wrote: »

    Again, how much would you be willing to pay for access and posting to AppleInsider? $10/month? How much do you think it costs to keep AppleInsider online 24/7/365? How many subscribers would it require to stay in business if its ads are blocked and advertisers stop paying?

    None of you pro ad blocker types will answer. Why?

    Because people want EVERYTHING(except their work) for free.

    YouTube is probably the biggest offender in stealing and giving things away.

    Hollywood, TV, Music industry should sue the living F*** out of them!!!!

    Almost every teen I know uses YouTube as their music streaming service and %98 of content is uploaded from unofficial sources.

    It doesn't end there but you get the idea.
Sign In or Register to comment.