I think it can be true in some situations. If you think of magazines, it would be a disappointment for Rolling Stone to contain no ads. Same for camera magazines.
News content really doesn't benefit, though. Just clickbait stuff.
News content really doesn't benefit, though. Just clickbait stuff.
I guess for something a bit more catch-all like "Rolling Stone" Ads would detract.
But for something like USA Hockey, honestly the Ads are more interesting than half the actual content. Although seeing the same 4 ads for home skating rinks has gotten old.
Although I guess this would be more akin to searching Google for "new hockey products" and then it would make a lot of sense to return pure ads.
I'll bite…because they're pretty? Or because how else would one stay on top of the latest Axe body spray releases?
This is more acute on hard news. Where a single page article may cost 100k to produce, yet wont be able to be monetized per its "cost to produce".
So yes, it would be a disappointment to lose "great content". now, here lies in the kicker. You get to decide great content with your patronage ( or lack there of)
"But what about things you didn't know you wanted?" I can't want something I don't know about. I can want something I can imagine, in which case I might go searching to see if someone else has made it reality. But I don't need others trying to artificially inflate my demand for goods and services.
But ‘Computer Shopper’ magazine on the other hand was half magazine, half catalog. The ads are the point.