Quote:
Originally Posted by ebusinesstutor
Interesting how the consensus is that no one wants their reading pleasure interrupted by ads.
But why do we then tolerate it in our television viewing and radio listening? Our whole broadcasting model is based on it.
Magazine and newspaper print publications also work this way, even when you pay for them.
|
Magazines and newspapers have pretty much always worked that way. The cover price or subscription price may not even cover the direct costs. Ads are where they make money. (And there's been continual tension between editorial and advertising over keeping the distinction between them clear. Any hint that ads influenced editorial content could be deadly, and there were internal battles over
placement of ads. Until recently, for example, the front page of a newspaper was off limits for ads. The increasing move of advertising to online sources finally broached that barrier as newspapers grew more desperate to attract ads.)
And the deal in radio and TV has been "free, but ad supported" all along.
This has
not been the case with books, and the type of content is one good reason. Radio, TV, magazines, and newspapers tend to mixes of shorter content (and scripts for radio and TV are written to provide convenient places for ad breaks). The ad isn't that great an interruption.
Books require a longer attention span and greater concentration. Depending on the book, you may not
want to be interrupted, and being so may be jarring. (My SO becomes totally absorbed while reading, and reacts with a startled "What? Who?" if an external event breaks her concentration.)
If books had ads from the beginning, it would not be seen as an issue, but they haven't, and it is.
______
Dennis