Seems that the strategy is to trigger curiosity, then pull person by this curiosity to show him a lot of ads. To trigger curiosity they pose some artifically created question, by inventing an imaginary gut doctor with some imaginary obscure opinion, and create a bunch of content that seems promising on answering question, but never answers it actually. The answer is irrelevant for their goals and all the scheme works while answer is not accessible easily.
This scheme can be scaled by a lot of misterious clickbaity questions without answers, because an attention of a person searching for answer for some question can be redirected to another question, then to one more, and more... It looks as a labyrinth where you could follow clickbaits and where you never able to find answer for question bothering you. Moreover you a facing a lot of other mysterious questions and if you got tired for the current one, then your attention might get caught by another, and you might continue to run through the labyrinth, clicking, clicking, clicking...
I guess what is the business model behind this. Showing ads? Skewing metrics?
I don't mind ad-supported content, but I don't want to see this Taboola/Outbrain garbage. So I created a short blocklist (compatible with uBlock Origin and Adblock Plus) for these clickbait ad networks. Pull requests are welcome! :)
They clearly said that they don't mind ads as long as it's not this click bait crap. I guess it pays really well because every newspaper web site has it :(
Taboola/Outbrain provide unique demand. If you fill the extra space on a page with the same type of ads you have elsewhere on the page, you will exhaust the high-paying inventory for that page and quickly get diminishing returns.
It is better to not block ads. Just leave website if you don’t like it. I don’t think you so desperate about the content, also the ads quality will help you decide about content quality.
> It is better to not block ads. Just leave website if you don’t like it.
IMO it's better to do both. Ad supported websites are usually not worth spending time on, but on the occasion, you can still send a signal that you disapprove of this business model.
> the ads quality will help you decide about content quality.
Usually, the very presence of ads tell you the site content is most likely garbage.
Just test it yourself. I've googled "iphone 11", here is first 3 links:
1) https://www.techradar.com/news/iphone-xi
Absolute trash, playing video, obtrusive ads, popup. Thank you but no, I don't want to consume shit even if content is stellar (actually it is not).
Blocking ads is bad for everyone, because you still "consume" the website and it has incentive to continue while users are ok with that (not leaving). More likely your ad-block provider sells you visiting history to similarweb or so because nothing is free :)
> Blocking ads is bad for everyone, because you still "consume" the website and it has incentive to continue while users are ok with that
Maybe it is so. But it is not enough to watch ads. Try for yourself, use adblocker for a month. You'll see that it is just plain impossible to use site with ads. You believe that ads is normal, and it is the only reason why you conform.
Haven't articles always had attractive headlines? Newspapers had them for a long time so people seeing the front page would want to buy that day's paper. The only difference between then and now is that the article's content is more likely to be low-quality.
Or at least some indication that this article is somehow different from every other article about clickbait. Though I'll admit, having read it, that I'm unclear on just what that is.
I'm more interested in the part where the answer to which vegetable to throw out is found at the end of a 40 minute video...having come across similar videos, have to ask, does this actually work?
Yup, selling something. Even if it's selling awareness of gut problems so people realize they may have a problem and start looking for a solution.
(That's behind a lot of marketing actually, making people think they have a problem; that they have gut issues, that they're not cleaning hygienically enough (and that there's germs everywhere), that they need to have a four hour erection at age 70, that they need to go skydiving in tight white pants while on their period, that someone might shoot a cannon at their boat so they need tape to patch it, that their abs are not good enough so they need another gym device that fits under their bed, etc.
Thought the 4-hour work week was an interesting pitch (less work, passive income – yes please) until I realised he was financing himself via a borderline-scam product like nutrition supplements...
Yes, and the author acknowledges that twice in the two very first paragraphs. This objection comes up every time any news outlet writes about ad tech or tracking, and it always comes down to the same thing: the people writing articles are not the ones making economic decisions and they can criticise a system even when they’re part of it.
I can confirm this as I used to work as a developer for a media company. We basically begged our advertisment executive for permission to get rid of that horrible box of semi- to unrelated content which appeared beneath every article. His answer was "No, it genereates too much revenue".
tl;dr - Vox is trying to figure out what that mysterious vegetable is that some gut doctor has been going on about in every ad box ever. Their best guess is that it's corn, but the doctor (or more specifically, his publicist) won't confirm.
This scheme can be scaled by a lot of misterious clickbaity questions without answers, because an attention of a person searching for answer for some question can be redirected to another question, then to one more, and more... It looks as a labyrinth where you could follow clickbaits and where you never able to find answer for question bothering you. Moreover you a facing a lot of other mysterious questions and if you got tired for the current one, then your attention might get caught by another, and you might continue to run through the labyrinth, clicking, clicking, clicking...
I guess what is the business model behind this. Showing ads? Skewing metrics?