Adscribers: Users who are unwillingly subscribing to ads.

(Part I)

TL;DR: In the digital age, where content is as ubiquitous as the devices that display it, the publishing industry pendulum went “from everything is free”, being monetized by ads, to “everything is paid”, paywalling almost everything. The paradigms of subscription services are undergoing significant transformation. Media giants, once reliant solely on the loyalty of their readers to sustain operations, are now exploring the dual avenues of subscription fees and advertising revenue. This shift has given rise to a new breed of consumer, the “Adscriber,” who navigates the confluence of premium access and ad exposure.

Despite news publishers in general struggling to make money in the digital era, several notable publications appear to be doing well. Top of the list, of course, with 10+ million subscribers, is The New York Times (NYT). In conversations with industry professionals, a recurring question surfaces: How does the NYT achieve such impressive subscription numbers, a feat that remains elusive for many other publishers?

This question is further exacerbated by new data from the Reuters Institute’s Digital News Report 2024 , where researchers asked online news subscribers how much they actually paid for their subscriptions. Across the 20 countries surveyed, an astounding 41% said they were paying less than full price for their online news subscription (46% in the United States, where the majority of the NYT’s subscribers reside).

So, how is the NYT making money, if nearly half its subscribers are paying a discounted rate?

Short answer: ads.

The Role of Ads in Subscription Success

The NYT’s subscription success may paradoxically be fueled by ads. This approach essentially says, “If you won’t subscribe at the normal (high) rate, we’ll make it extremely affordable to sign up because we can monetize your attention through ads.” This strategy was underscored by my own personal experience with the NYT’s promotional rates: faced with a renewal choice between a hefty $20 per month or a drastically reduced $10 for an entire year — a discount of 97% over the original model — once I rejected the original offer, I realized the NYT’s true product is not just its journalism, but the audience it attracts for advertisers.

From Subscribers to Adscribers

Traditional subscriptions appeal primarily to those deeply invested in the content, but the broader audience — who may suffer from subscription fatigue — needs a different approach. My experience of the last 10 years — Cosmin’s Law ?? — suggests that 98% of users hesitate to commit to subscriptions, leading to lost revenue under conventional models… and leading to lost revenue from ads as well.

While ads continue to promise significant revenue through low-friction interactions, the catch is visibility. If users can’t get past the paywall, they can’t see the ads. Thus, publishers lose potential revenue from both non-subscribers and unseen ads. How should we refer to this type of consumer? How about Adscribers? Let’s say Adscribers are those media consumers who are valued less for their subscription fees and more for the ad revenue they generate. If this is a trend, it represents a significant shift in media revenue strategies. Publications like The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and The New York Times have all adopted hybrid models, combining low-cost subscriptions with ad revenues, addressing the high digital consumption but low willingness to pay.

To be fair, the NYT has all but admitted as much. Joy Robins, NYT’s global chief advertising officer, was at Cannes earlier in June, where she told AdExchanger that the publication’s advertising business is stronger because of its subscription base. In Robins’ own words, having a “strong first-party relationship with readers helps us create a premium environment for them that advertisers can also benefit from.”

The Implications of Transparent Business Models

This dual-revenue approach has profound implications. On one hand, it democratizes access to content, which is essential for public discourse. On the other, it risks devaluing journalism by telling consumers that the publication is worth a fraction of what they want to be worth. Greater transparency about this model could, however, change the game. If publications disclosed their reliance on ads, consumers could make more informed subscription choices. Transparency might foster trust and recalibrate the perceived value of news consumption.

Moreover, offering varied access options — single article purchases or time-limited passes — could provide true choice and cater to diverse consumer preferences. Our company exemplifies this by offering flexible access, ensuring users aren’t forced into subscriptions they don’t want. We have to believe that consumers are ready and willing to pay, if presented with user friendly options to buy access to content — and if the content is good or great.

The Future of Journalism in the Age of Adscribers

The future of journalism likely lies in offering true choice. Allowing consumers to choose between ad-supported access, individual article purchases, timed passes, and full subscriptions can address diverse preferences and market realities. Legacy publications must innovate without sacrificing quality. The rise of Adscribers signals a pivotal moment in media consumption — one that could redefine journalism’s digital age. By embracing these models, publications can maintain their reputations while adapting to the evolving digital landscape. This balance of innovation and quality will be crucial in shaping the future of journalism, ensuring it remains both viable and valued.

In part II I will suggest a third way of making money in addition to ads and subscriptions.