The Interledger Community 🌱: Alex Shiffer

Web Monetization Payment Option For a Multi-Publisher Local News Hub - Final Report

Alex Shiffer — Wed, 10 Nov 2021 20:54:14 +0000

Our Web Monetization (WM) project was completed on October 24, 2021. Its integration with our multi-publication digital publishing system took much longer than planned, but we found the implementation of necessary technologies - Coil, Uphold, etc. - to be straightforward and well documented.

We added the WM functionality to three websites: kingstonwire.com, shawangunkjournal.com and newsatomic.com. The readership of these sites overlaps and we expected that the transparency of the WM system would be a big benefit to them.

One of the biggest struggles we had was bridging the knowledge gap for people not familiar with setting up a web browser plug-in or app. These readers did not understand what a plug-in was, which resulted in additional time dedicated to troubleshooting the install for these readers, even after providing them with step-by-step instructions through our website and via email. They also appeared to have trouble understanding that the install was specific to a single browser. This knowledge gap appears to be potentially prohibitive for small digital newspapers that don’t have dedicated tech support staff.

Another pain point involved the news publishers. We found that readers were not spending enough time on a single article to accumulate actual revenue, which means the project would not be financially viable or attractive to other small publishers in its current iteration. After years educating our market that local journalism isn't free, our publishers could not agree to sell it for pennies. One publisher also suggested that a timed approach to monetization may disincentive people from thoroughly reading an article. Thus the problem regarding people reading only the headline and the first sentence would not be resolved by using this system.

However, readers who understood how to install plug-ins did not have a problem with installation or using WM. They found its automatic opening of articles to be simple and convenient. But although these readers recalled experiencing a relatively seamless application of the project, their read rates still did not garner any significant revenue for the publishers, even when using the most active days for reads and extrapolating that time to a full month.

One low-tech but high-interest reader had this to say about WM:

“It was an interesting web experience. After registering and getting a starter subscription, I wandered the halls of Coil. Tried Space Squid for some SF, checked out Reductress - very interesting - and that made me wonder, deeply, well deeply enough to look at Ladyspike, to see what women think. I came away wondering about smirks and what women might really think. Not being into video games - last game I played was Sim City 1996 - I moved on to Fader and music selections. Very nice. Or cool. Or some other term du jour. Could see checking them out further. I did recognize three names, and one of them was Adele. Then it was on to NewsAtomic to see how things worked reading closer to home with Coil attached. Worked fine. So good, so far.”

In all this project does not appear to be a viable web monetization system for small news outlets whose articles vary in length and complexity, and whose readers have varying degrees of technological comfort. This system may be better suited for a digital platform that has a set list of tasks that can be completed in a fixed minimum block of time, such as a video game platform.

OBJECTIVES

Initially we had a goal of having a buy-in from all the third-party news publishers that currently use our NewsAtomic platform. However, after seeing the difficulty in setup and the near non-existent return on investment, we decided to keep the rollout to a smaller group, just involving Kingston Wire, Shawangunk Journal, and general use of NewsAtomic by readers.

Our second goal of having a successful implementation of the web monetization system, albeit much smaller than originally anticipated, was reached. The system worked as designed: readers easily toggled the system on to open a story and off to close it. The timer would continue ticking even when readers would click on “Related Coverage” or the next article that appears when clicking the site’s “Next” button. And with the timer still in the On position, those articles opened automatically.

Some test readers described how their reading experience was much more enjoyable and fluid using WM. Apparently, two-clicks to an article is one too many! With WM, they could swipe from article to article with no impediments.

READER ENGAGEMENT

This project was not made public due to the initial hurdles we experienced with the limited revenue and the aforementioned knowledge gap regarding browser plug-ins and apps. We engaged various groups of readers, held information meetings where we served pastries, and went over the instructions. About 50% of those folks actually went on the system.

WHAT'S NEXT?

The concept of micropayments for small outlets is a cornerstone of our mission and we are interested in continuing to pursue and refine this concept for small news outlets across the country. We still believe that, with enough time and expertise, we can solve this problem for the benefit of all independent, locally owned news outlets that are still struggling to turn a profit per story on their digital platforms. WM gave us a glimpse of a future where our readers can read seamlessly from one publication to another and provide publishers an opportunity to monetize viral stories when they are lucky enough to have one.

We do see amazing potential for this web monetization system. One that could truly save the local newsroom, with just a few modifications. If the tool allowed for more variability regarding pricing, it may have a better chance at implementation among smaller publishers. The system could vary pricing by content category instead of having one blanket price for all, like one rate for local news and another for national. Or something eventually even more granular. For example, NewsAtomic’s CMS includes content categories such as “News Short” for shorter articles, then “News” for articles with a length over 400 words, and other categories like Columns, and Op-Eds. Perhaps the system could start with a default price, like 25 cents for 30 seconds, but then allow the publisher the option to set a specific price for each of these categories. Its use still may be limited to readers who are a bit more tech savvy, but the revenue rate might be more enticing. By opting for a variable pricing model, publishers can pick and choose the WM platform that fits for them, thus earning them that extra revenue each small, independent publisher so desperately needs.

Web Monetization Payment Option For a Multi-Publisher Local News Hub — Grant Report #240

Alex Shiffer — Fri, 09 Apr 2021 21:06:58 +0000

After a delayed start, the project is going well. We have fully integrated WM into our publishing system. Each publication is set up with a payment pointer and account so as a reader navigates their news feed, the appropriate pointer is used and publisher account is credited. We have created a WM widget for our main payment bar that reports when WM is active, which publication is getting funded and the aggregate total for the current reading session. We also enhanced the CMS so publication and publisher records can be configured to use WM.

Our project has now essentially two objectives: integrating WM as one of our payment methods into our multi-publication digital publishing system, and to pilot that method with a few selected readers and gauge feedback. The third objective, working with our participating publishers to design a pricing structure that incorporates WM with our other two methods - subscription and per-article payments - has been somewhat thwarted by the inflexibility in setting the WM rate. At the time we submitted the grant, we were not aware of this fact. Hopefully, it can change.

First objective was the more technical and involved component, and is now complete and functional on our UAT environment. It will be put into production after we create the supporting documentation for end users, which is what we currently are working on.

The second objective - piloting the system with some end users - has some interesting and unanticipated factors. Due to the inflexibility of pricing (as far as we can tell) with Coil, users will see an estimated 90% reduction in costs to use our system. More details on this below. I think when we ask them what they think, assuming the on-boarding process is not too strenuous, will be "wow, I love it!" Used to cost me $5/month. Now it's just $0.50." Not sure how to control for this factor when gauging whether the technology is a net benefit for existing readers.

Still, we're excited in seeing how this plays out, and will be reaching out to our readers later in the month, after the documentation is complete.

The technical/backend work is mostly complete - that was our focus for the first half of the project, and is the key activity that has had the most...activity, to date. We found the implementation of necessary technologies - Coil, Uphold, etc - to be straightforward and well documented, and went surprisingly smoothly. The JS libraries seemed well put together and did not conflict with the frameworks that run our system, so we felt comfortable adopting them.

We have not yet publicized the grant or the enhancements to the NewsAtomic system. We want the WM system to be in place before we do that, so there's something to look at. When the pilot begins at the end of this month, we will send out the PR announcing the grant, the new features, and the opportunity to participate.

What’s next?

The big stumbling block for us to put this technology into production is the $0.36 hourly rate. For a local, community focused publication with readership measured in thousands, this rate will not generate the reader revenue necessary to sustain such a publication. Typical subscriptions are $5/month, and typical total monthly usage times are between 1 and 2 hours, thus WM will only produce 10% or so of typical revenue.

The problem here is that we're starting at a different place than perhaps many other content providers implementing WM technology. We aren't trying to monetize what had previously been free content. That's always a heavy lift, and WM is a perfect way to ease that transition. We have spent years educating our market that local journalism isn't free, to overcome the ingrained resistance to paying for news. The mindset is evolving, and we've made the case that our product is worth what we charge, which is considerably more than what WM provides.

The other big stumbling block we're facing is the complexity of on-ramping a reader. It's a multi-step, involved process that, as it stands today, only the most computer-savvy reader will undertake. A significant portion of our readership are elderly, and it can be a real tech support challenge to just get them logged in. It is out of the question that they would install a browser plugin or set up a digital wallet. So that cuts down the pool of potential WM adopters, reducing its viability.

Our company started as a dial-up ISP in the early 90s, and we continue to work in this dynamic space of where high tech meets an unsophisticated public. One thing we learned early on is that if we as a company specify a technology as part of our service, we in effect "are" that tech, in the eyes of our customers. Hence if we say "go get an Uphold account for your digital wallet and add the Coil Chrome extension," we are now on the hook for how that tech works and what it does to an end-user's computer. In other words, they call us when they don't understand it or it stops working. Even for a software company like us that has a tech support infrastructure in place, that's not a small consideration. For a small publisher alone, it's out of the question.

But all is not lost! Where WM can really help is with viral stories. We published a piece in 2019 about a kid physically removed from school because his parents refused to vaccinate him. Well, the anti-vax community got wind of the piece, and we were inundated with traffic - 50 times the norm. We have a hard paywall, so 99% of that traffic didn't convert to anything - they just went away. With WM in place, and with the client tools having widespread adoption, we would have been able to monetize that traffic. But be mindful of the caveat - "widespread adoption". No anti-vaxxer is going to go through the steps to WM enable their computer to read one particular article. Widespread adoption is a critical piece for this to work, as I'm sure the community understands.

The Interledger Community 🌱: Alex Shiffer

Web Monetization Payment Option For a Multi-Publisher Local News Hub - Final Report

Web Monetization Payment Option For a Multi-Publisher Local News Hub — Grant Report #240

What’s next?

Additional comments

Relevant links/resources (optional)