Here's the thing with user experience

[drwex]

I tried to read an article on wired.com just this evening and got treated to this:




Congratulations, WIRED, you've just lost my business. I won't be linking to you, reading your articles, and I'm cancelling my print subscription. Way to piss off your readers.

ETA: Comments make clear that the static image doesn't convey my objection, which is not to paying for content, nor paywalls in general, but to the specific WIRED implementation which at first looks like a normal page but then gives the visual effect of slamming a door in my face. My objection is not to the principle, but to the user experience.

Comments

[rednikki.livejournal.com]

What bothers you about this?

[drwex]

I suppose the still image doesn't convey it. The effect of the javascript is like having a door slammed in your face. You see the page at first, but then it's covered up. It's abrupt and rude. For comparison the NY Times/Globe have a limited access policy and you get notifications when you're getting close to the limit.

[rednikki.livejournal.com]

I've actually experienced it myself with Wired. I got out my credit card. It was effective for me. I haven't paid for NYTimes or Globe.

[drwex]

That's interesting. I respond to requests. As noted below I pay for content via Patreon, YouTube, and other direct means, all in response to requests from sites that I use/visit. This experience felt so hostile to me by comparison that I was completely turned off.

[intuition-ist.livejournal.com]

it feels similar to a big hulking guy suddenly appearing in front of you and "suggesting" that you'll need to pay him so you can have the privilege of getting rid of him...that ain't no suggestion, no matter how cutely, cleverly, or politely it's put.

I think I'll join you in ignoring Wired very severely.

[minkrose]

.... yes, god forbid we pay people for their work???? wtf is your problem??


I can't let this pass; this is how my sister GETS. PAID. and you think that's some bullshit reason to stop supporting journalism?

at least they're offering an online paid option instead of ads! I wish online journalism had figured that out years ago, I think they'd be less fucked now. but you don't deserve free content, the world doesn't work that way. if you don't pay for it, you'll either get creepier targeted marketing articles or there won't be anything else left.


(I'm probably not going to have the patience to read any responses to this; I know too much about it, and your post is really offensive to me).

[drwex]

I already pay (paid) for the magazine. I also pay for content through means including Patreon, YouTube, direct contributions on sites, and so on. I don't object to paying for content I want.

As noted above, my issue is not with the policy but the experience which I realize the static image doesn't convey. It's a rude and hostile user experience that completely turns me off.

[darxus.livejournal.com]

Seems pretty reasonable (of them) to me.

[c1.livejournal.com]

Oddly if you have an iDevice, you can use the News app to access Wired content. No ads, no paywall.

[psybelle.livejournal.com]

I gotta wonder how long that loophole is going to last….

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

Annoyingly enough, by posting such a wide image with no LJ-cut, you're ruining my LiveJournal user experience. I currently have to scroll side-to-side to read anything.

Pls fix.

[drwex]

Hurm. Apologies. I thought I had tested for that sufficiently. I will fix now - please let me know what you're reading on so I can test better next time.

[silentq.livejournal.com]

Another data point: Same happened to me when I expanded the cut (thanks for including it!), Safari browser on Mac laptop.

[drwex]

*ding* Thank you. I do not have Safari easily accessible to me so did not test it. I appreciate the feedback.