A pop-up style message appeared to users who used an ad blocker restricting access to the Times portal giving the access option either by including the site to the ““Whitelist” of the blocker or subscribing digitally to her.
“The best things are not free”, said the message when entering the New York Times. “Currently, you have an ad blocker installed. Advertising helps fund our journalism. To continue enjoying Times, please support us in one of the following ways.”
As to whether The New York Times would block readers who did not choose one of these two options, the spokeswoman said:
We plan to test several options if users opt out of the site's whitelist. Our goal is to inform users of the harms of ad blocking and encourage addition to the nytimes.com whitelist,” said the initiative's spokesperson. Ad blockers do not serve the long-term interests of consumers.
Creating quality news content is expensive and digital advertising is one way The New York Times and other high-quality news providers raise operating funds.
At an industry conference on February 23, the New York Times Co. CEO Mark Thompson, said the company was considering banning ad blockers, reasoning that “they're not really helping you pay for what you consume.”
Mr. Thompson, in the past, strongly criticized the notion of paying ad-blocking companies to have the Times exempt from their services, which he called dishonorable.
Several publishers, including The Washington Post and Forbes, have experimented with similar approaches to combating the rise of ad blocking. Wired magazine recently began offering an ad-free version of its website for $1 a week. The magazine told readers that users with ad blockers will be restricted from accessing the site.
Elsewhere Monday, the Interactive Advertising Agency unveiled a “first” offering potential resources for publishers who have been affected by the widespread application of ad blockers.
