Advertisers complain about format & approval obstacles with iOS 9's News app

Posted:
in iPhone edited September 2015
Advertisers are reportedly upset with the restrictions Apple has placed on formats for iOS 9's News app -- as well as the barriers campaigns must pass for approval.




Apple CEO Tim Cook has been forced to back off some policies, industry sources told the New York Post. A given example is that Apple only recently let publishers embed articles with links back to their own websites. Without that option, the worry was that critical visitor traffic might be drained away.

Although publishers like CNN, Time, and Vox are making most of their content available in the app, some are said to be planning to offer a few dozen stories a day at most. Standouts in that sense include companies that depend on paid subscription models, such as the New York Times and Wall Street Journal.

Some ad executives have complained that common tools like real-time placement bidding aren't in place for the News launch, and that Apple is requiring 48 hours notice before approving a campaign. The company is also allegedly demanding that pre-roll ads before video segments get their own approval.

Apple is moreover refusing to support Google's DoubleClick ad platform. Edward Kim, a member of the online marketing company SimpleReach, argued to the Post that Apple is attempting to use News to build up iAd. That platform has struggled to gain ground in a market dominated by Google -- whereas Google ads can reach virtually any device, iAd is unusable in some key spaces, like Android.

The News app will go live when iOS 9 debuts this Wednesday. Apple is aiming to make the app a central source for news of all kinds, but presented in a way friendlier to iPhones and iPads. Publishers will get to keep all of the revenue from ads they sell on their own -- but Apple will take 30 percent of backfill revenue.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 42
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,154member

    Good. If they weren't complaining, that means Apple is doing something wrong. To provide a great consumer experience, you often are required to impose stringent requirements, limitations, and regulations on your partners and content providers. If they don't like it, they can advertise elsewhere. 

  • Reply 2 of 42
    19831983 Posts: 1,183member

    Advertisers with Apple are always bloody complaining! Here they have a new platform for making more money, but its not enough for them...greedy mongrels!

  • Reply 3 of 42
    dunksdunks Posts: 1,240member
    Music to my ears. I'd prefer they didn't have preroll ads though. Seriously the worst kind!
  • Reply 4 of 42
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,652member

    It's nice that Apple doesn't need to be in bed with Google.  Apple calls the shots, not Google.  I'm looking forward to seeing Google's ad business imploding when Apple takes its business away.



    Without Google's ad revenues, all the other gazillion beta-only projects will pretty much vaporize too.



    Hmm... nice time to short GOOG?

  • Reply 5 of 42
    The complainers are not being forced to participate with Apple News. They can choose to support a platform that gives them what they want how they want it. Walk away from Apple or STFU!
  • Reply 6 of 42
    croprcropr Posts: 944member

    Apple iAd does not exists on e.g. Android, but Apple does not allow ads from competing advertisement suppliers in its new News app.  Because a lot of content providers depend on ad revenue that is managed by advertisement managers like DoubleClick, content providers will incur additional costs.  It costs more to have 2 advertisement managers than to have a single one covering all devices, especially if one of the two imposes additional restrictions like the 48 approval cyclus.  More content providers will be forced to a subscription model iso an ad supported model.

     

    Eventually this is not good for the end customer, who will be forced to pay a subscription for the content that is now offered for free (with ads).

     

    I sincerely hope that app developers who depend on ad revenue, won't face the same restrictions in iOS10, because this will hurt them very hard (I am one of them)

  • Reply 7 of 42
    cropr wrote: »
    Eventually this is not good for the end customer, who will be forced to pay a subscription for the content that is now offered for free (with ads).

    that's an opinion, not fact. I pay subscriptions for Netflix and HBO, which have no ads. is that bad for me the end consumer? I don't think so.
  • Reply 8 of 42
    croprcropr Posts: 944member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy View Post





    that's an opinion, not fact. I pay subscriptions for Netflix and HBO, which have no ads. is that bad for me the end consumer? I don't think so.

     

    As long as you as end customer has the choice between subscription based and ad based content, there is no issue.  But if more and more content providers are moving to subscription based content because of the imposed restrictions of the device owners, the choice for the end customers evaporates.  And that is definitely a bad thing for a large part of the consumers.

  • Reply 9 of 42
    icoco3icoco3 Posts: 1,459member
    sflocal wrote: »
    It's nice that Apple doesn't need to be in bed with Google.  Apple calls the shots, not Google.  I'm looking forward to seeing Google's ad business imploding when Apple takes its business away.


    Without Google's ad revenues, all the other gazillion beta-only projects will pretty much vaporize too.


    Hmm... nice time to short GOOG?

    Your kidding, their income will collapse and their stock will skyrocket... /s
  • Reply 10 of 42
    Advertising agencies can drown in their own tears. Marketing has gotten to the point where there's no free surface or quiet moment. It's beyond noise. It has become a manifestation of dystopian prediction. Capitalist greed and marketing obsessiveness runs every human environment that exists. Rules mean nothing. There's no sense of restraint shown anywhere in marketing, so I have zero sympathy for these marketer frustrations.
  • Reply 11 of 42
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,799member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cropr View Post

     

     

    As long as you as end customer has the choice between subscription based and ad based content, there is no issue.  But if more and more content providers are moving to subscription based content because of the imposed restrictions of the device owners, the choice for the end customers evaporates.  And that is definitely a bad thing for a large part of the consumers.


    Sounds like the consumer is in the process of defining the value of ads in their online experience. That's a good thing. If consumers collectively end up killing off many of these content providers in the process, some of the good with the bad, it would still be an opportunity for new content providers to come into the market and find opportunities under a new income paradigm.

     

    I've decided that I will adblock everything, with very few exceptions, and add my weight to a potential disruption in the internet. Hopefully, a movement towards micropayments, subscriptions, and inline ads will result, but I doubt that advertising supported sites will end.

     

    I expect that their will be sites that I frequent that I won't be able to access anymore. 

  • Reply 12 of 42
    To me, the News app only makes sense if the content is hosted within the app. If I'm constantly clicking on links to be taken elsewhere so as to read further, the experience would not be good and the app would be rendered rather unnecessary.
  • Reply 13 of 42

    Is it possible that people (like me) are just sick and tired of ads?

  • Reply 14 of 42
    slurpy wrote: »
    Good. If they weren't complaining, that means Apple is doing something wrong. To provide a great consumer experience, you often are required to impose stringent requirements, limitations, and regulations on your partners and content providers. If they don't like it, they can advertise elsewhere. 
    I concur.
  • Reply 15 of 42
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,293member
    slurpy wrote: »
    Good. If they weren't complaining, that means Apple is doing something wrong. To provide a great consumer experience, you often are required to impose stringent requirements, limitations, and regulations on your partners and content providers. If they don't like it, they can advertise elsewhere. 

    Agreed. Perhaps Apple insist ads are true and not misleading... imagine the horror!
  • Reply 16 of 42
    eriamjheriamjh Posts: 1,134member
    ceek74 wrote: »
    Is it possible that people (like me) are just sick and tired of ads?

    Nope. They seem worse than ever. Popups are not in their own windows, but are overlays. Some are timed and cannot be dismissed. It blows.
  • Reply 17 of 42
    croprcropr Posts: 944member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    LIES.

     

    If you content is GREAT than people will be willing to pay for it. PERIOD.

     

    I'm sick, Sick, SICK, SICK, of ads!




    You are willing to pay for content, but lucky for us you are not everybody.  The majority of the people are not willing to pay or worse, they don't have the means to pay.

     

    It is definitely a bad thing for the consumer if e.g. the olympic games in Rio 2016 would be hidden behind pay walls.

  • Reply 18 of 42
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,149member

    I smell a FCC anti-competitive investigation starting any minute now. /s

  • Reply 19 of 42
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    People may be sick of ads, but it's what keeps the lights on for sites like AppleInsider.
    My issue has less to do with ads themselves but the implementation of them. Pre-rolls, auto play, Flash, are just a few annoyances.

    And I wish some tech sites would just some hire a designer. Having animated gifs and banners abruptly stuffed in between articles or in the middle of a story does not make for a pleasant experience.
  • Reply 20 of 42
    boredumbboredumb Posts: 1,415member

    If there's one thing I hate, it's making "ad executives" upset...

    These selfless idealists do nothing each day but strive to make our lives richer...

    or so they tell me.

Sign In or Register to comment.