The crazy thing about this whole newsletter and popup thing in general is that, why in the hell would I give out my email address or anything else 1 second after entering a website? How and where exactly is the connection there that makes sense?
I actually sent a strongly worded email to MIT Tech Review yesterday (there was an article on the front page) because they have 3 separate popups on first-entry to the site. Like, wtf? Have you not heard of timed popups (such as those that trigger past a certain element), or popups that don't make you want to immediately close the site?
It's so pathetic and such a 2005 trend, it's hard to believe people still do it in the most annoying way possible.
> Have you not heard of timed popups (such as those that trigger past a certain element), or popups that don't make you want to immediately close the site?
How about NO POP-UPs? Remember when browsers came with built-in pop-up blockers so users didn't have to deal with them at all? Newsletter sign-ups are the same bullshit as 90s style pop-ups, and everyone agreed we should block those then, why are these different?
I don't want timed pop-ups, or pop-ups that are more convenient, I want NO POP-UPs, and as soon as I see one I am closing the tab and writing off the website as not worth my time.
I don't mean to call you out specifically, I don't think you're arguing in favor of pop-ups, but I'm just confused why your initial response was to ask for lesser evil pop-ups, rather than no pop-ups at all.
They do it because it works. Many people on the internet are not tech savvy and they just assume that in order to view the content they must input their email. It doesn't help that the close button is sometimes barely visible.
I own an ecommerce company, and while I can't tell you the why, I can tell you that ~6% of people fill mine out. Is it annoying? Yup. Would it absolutely, unequivocally, be a bad business decision to take it down? Yup.
You know what else I've got on the site? One of those annoying little notifications that comes up in the bottom right to say "Someone bought this four hours ago!" I hate those things! I swore I'd never put them on my site!
The problem is, when I swore that, I was making the same mistake that you are here - assuming that I was the target and that everyone is like me. The reality is they are not, and these things work well. They're ubiquitous on ecommerce sites for a reason.
> Have you not heard of timed popups (such as those that trigger past a certain element)
In the sites I interact with, that is probably the majority of these popups. You find them preferable?
I find them just as annoying and counter-productive as OP is describing.
For one thing, when your heuristics say I'm getting interested, that's when you decide to interrupt my attention? It's like they've intentionally decided to algorithmically make this as annoying as possible, when is the time we can interrupt the reader as annoyingly as we can?
And as you say, even if I've read 35% of an article or something, it may still be the first time I'm interacting with a site, and why do I want to give them my email address?
> Have you not heard of timed popups (such as those that trigger past a certain element), or popups that don't make you want to immediately close the site?
They're arguably worse because it's a slap in the face while focusing on something.
I’ve seen a few websites recently with a pleasant newsletter experience.
The signup field is a few paragraphs down the article and as you scroll to it, the article dims (but is still readable) and highlights the newsletter section. As you keep scrolling the the dimming fades out and you can read the article again.
This is much less jarring than a pop up and is placed after the reader gets to read at their pace.
Sometimes I feel its time to build separate Internet with a new protocol like Gemini but better. A protocol tht is resistant to all the BS of modern web.
Reminds me of browsing car and other shopping sites. They always pop up these chat windows and have stupid discount spinners that popup as soon as you access the site. I'm not going to spin for a deal on a shopping site I've never used before I even get a chance to actually look for something to buy.
Think about it from the websites perspective. If you visit their website and leave without "converting" in any sense then why are they serving you? It's like do you get annoyed when servers leave a bill on your way out of the restaurant? Content sites are just trying to reacclimate people to recognizing that they just provided value. Ads are worth less than ever so they need to a relationship to milk. Emails are cheap.
Web layouts have *evolved* in a bizarre way, especially when businesses are paying for results and the user experience comes second. Popups (or whatever the cute new euphemism is) are an easy way to add new garbage to a site while separating the garbage from the content. Cookie banners, logins, paywalls, and more!
Despite this topic being brought up regularly, these pop-up forms do work. That's why everyone uses them.
Disclaimer: I use them and so do many of my competitors.
"Does a poor job of increasing conversions" is the opinion of someone that has never looked at the data. You can be sure that the people interested in conversions run analytics and A/B testing on everything. If these pop-ups did a poor job and there was a better alternative, you can be sure that everyone would have already migrated to that alternative.
The "rule of seven" can also be used to counter her argument. That is precisely why businesses try to get the email of visitors: to have more interactions. Otherwise, for the vast majority of visitors, the first visit would be the only interaction they will ever have.
"Works against user goals" might be true for short term goals like jumping through the most amount of content. However, users have different goals and short-term ones are often not the best goals. A pop-up might address other long-term goals the visitor cares more about than going to yet another web page.
But more than anything, these pop-ups serve business goals because most of these websites exist only thanks to their revenue. Without them my business would probably not be viable. I assume that many accept the small annoyance of a pop-up as the cost of keeping the websites they like running. And if the pop-up appears when the user is about to close the window, it does not even stop a visitor in his tracks. He can still close the window without any extra click.
There is exactly zero percent chance that I will subscribe to any newsletter when I haven't read even the first article on your site fully.
Maybe if I see myself coming back to the site for insightful stuff, then I might consider a newsletter - but even that I'll subscribe to using my RSS reader (NewsBlur).
Can't upvote this submission, and the spirit of the post, enough. These drive me absolutely crazy. The decentralized news/opinion revolution is probably a net positive. But this, specific, behavior related to it, drives me nuts.
Many years ago I made TabClosedDidntRead.com - a collection of invasive overlays - to highlight this trend when it first started (and wrote it up [0] though much of that probably doesn't stand up so well now). I had to stop collecting them after a few months as it became most sites rather than some sites, and things have only gotten much worse since. It looks like TC;DR is no longer up, presumably I just lost hope at some point.
It only takes some people to accept the newsletter/messages to make it worth it, unfortunately. Probably the reason the practice could ever stop would be the marginal cost of the messages or newsletter to rise above engagement. That’s probably much higher for a newsletter than the push notifications.
"If “the rule of seven” — that a customer needs to interact seven times before buying — is marketing 101, why does the site demand a newsletter conversion before a new user has even finished reading one article?"
This seems to really misunderstand things - if the customer has hit your website because they came to one of your SEO-optimized blog articles, there is a very solid chance they're not going to stumble upon your site again. The point of the newsletter conversion is to give you a chance to get those seven interactions.
All of these complaints boil down to people wanting something for free, without any inconvenience at all, even something as minor as clicking an extra button.
Unfortunately, most websites require an actual business model to consistently produce content. Business models usually need a form of lead gathering, or audience building. (Which is, frankly, core to most businesses.)
If you don't want to engage with businesses, then there are still endless hobby websites out there that do little other than produce content for free, without any popups, ads, upsells, etc.
If businesses want money for their content, then they should ask for money BEFORE they send it to whoever asks. Pestering someone after they send the article feels so scummy.
There's a group of guys near where I live who stand around and hand CDs to tourists, and after a minute of chatting, start asking for "donations". It's the same vibe. Giving something of value to someone then using that to set the expectation that they should give something of value back. If you give something away, in my opinion, the transaction is complete. Trying to use that to get something in return is manipulative.
I'm a fan of LWN.net's[0] business model. (Enough that it's the only news source I actually subscribe to).
Links to external news articles are free for anyone to read, and for all account owners (paid or not) to comment on.
Featured articles by LWN's paid contributors are available for paid subscribers to read and comment on immediately, and for everyone else to read and for unpaid account owners to comment on between 7-14 days after first publication.[1] If you want to check out their past article quality, or just read interesting previous articles, you don't even need an account.
No pop-ups. No generic nag screens. If you're not a paid subscriber and you go to view an article you can't view yet, it tells you it's currently for subscribers only and how to get a subscription if you want one, but also tells you the date that the article will become free to read without a subscription.
Yes, I lurked for a few years before I became a paid member. Because I was able to read everything for free, the site built its reputation for me to the point where I was happy to subscribe to get those featured articles just a bit sooner. (And be able to participate in the comments in a timely fashion.)
[1] It's a bit complicated. Featured articles from throughout the week are collected every Thursday into the "Weekly Edition", and the Thursday after that that Weekly edition and all its articles are available for free.
I think the author of the article and many commenters here are saying they are more than happy to take their eyeballs to web sites that express a different worldview, or at least a different attitude toward users.
This happens in brick-and-mortar too. It has become difficult to buy something in person without being asked to sign up for a frequent shopper program -- sometimes very forcefully.
Apparently retailers despise the fact that some customers prefer to buy things anonymously without being spammed or having their privacy invaded. I predict B&M stores will soon begin to block you at the front door until you give them your email address.
What I don’t understand is why you can’t just put a nice big (or small) square or element or CTA on the page prominently that asks people to sign up for the newsletter.
Like, it’s fine, go ahead, ask me. Make it obtrusive. Hell you can make it blink. But why can’t I look at it and just scroll by it. Just like put it on the fucking page it’s not hard.
I think the whole theme of this article and thread is don't waste your time trying to sell to developers. they block your ads, don't buy your stuff, won't even sign up for your free newsletter to see if you add any value there. generally don't even believe in advertising and marketing. Most of them would rather build instead of buy, which is useful as a developer, but not great to form a business around.
The exception is Free Tiers so they can convince they're bosses to use your enterprise tier.
I often wonder how many human hours/days/weeks/years are lost on these cookie & newsletter modals. Too many. There should be some sort of standardised comms with the browser to say what the browser would accept, probably via HTTP headers in case JS is disabled - and then the site can deal with this if they take exception to the browser's defaults.
While I agree with you I must admit that it sometimes even save my time. When cookie/newsletter pop-up shows it breaks my procrastination habit. I ask my self in that moment if I really need to see that content. In most cases answer is no. So instead of closing the modal I just close whole tab.
Just a few days ago I was reading an article from some tech site complaining about ads in Windows and the first thing upon opening the side is a popup ad for a newsletter. Do they not see the irony there or is the whole industry on autopilot?
> If “the rule of seven” — that a customer needs to interact seven times before buying — is marketing 101, why does the site demand a newsletter conversion before a new user has even finished reading one article?
This has happened because Google, Facebook, Youtube and other walled gardens have locked up the online audience. If you clicked on a site, chances are you discovering it via one of the above. And chances are, you'll never see that site again if you close the tab. So that's the 'rule of 7' out the window right there.
If the popup converts even one person, that's better than it not being there at all.
"Yeah, but it's so annoying, I'll never subscribe via these tactics!" Congratulations, you are part of the rare few that know how the sausage is made. You probably also know that these modals aren't there for UX designers to praise or Substack to quake in their boots. They're there to convert.
If you use Substack and don't like this behavior you can turn it off, go to settings and look for "Subscribe prompts on post pages" and uncheck it.
I love Substack but think this feature is ill-considered. I am sure it converts by the numbers, but I want 100% of my readers to have a pristine experience reading, foremost.
The web has become quite unusable over the years with all the popups.
Perhaps we need a browser that uses AI to block all the annoying page elements?
Or we use crowd intelligence to achieve the task. If enough users flag the page elements that popup, and this data is shared, many could profit from a better experience.
Some ad-blockers already provide optional block-rules for "annoyance" elements. Unfortunately, they are less well supported. I used them for a while with AdNauseam until it ate some important UI element or other.
[+] [-] skilled|2 years ago|reply
I actually sent a strongly worded email to MIT Tech Review yesterday (there was an article on the front page) because they have 3 separate popups on first-entry to the site. Like, wtf? Have you not heard of timed popups (such as those that trigger past a certain element), or popups that don't make you want to immediately close the site?
It's so pathetic and such a 2005 trend, it's hard to believe people still do it in the most annoying way possible.
[+] [-] Grimm665|2 years ago|reply
How about NO POP-UPs? Remember when browsers came with built-in pop-up blockers so users didn't have to deal with them at all? Newsletter sign-ups are the same bullshit as 90s style pop-ups, and everyone agreed we should block those then, why are these different?
I don't want timed pop-ups, or pop-ups that are more convenient, I want NO POP-UPs, and as soon as I see one I am closing the tab and writing off the website as not worth my time.
I don't mean to call you out specifically, I don't think you're arguing in favor of pop-ups, but I'm just confused why your initial response was to ask for lesser evil pop-ups, rather than no pop-ups at all.
[+] [-] sourcecodeplz|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] idopmstuff|2 years ago|reply
You know what else I've got on the site? One of those annoying little notifications that comes up in the bottom right to say "Someone bought this four hours ago!" I hate those things! I swore I'd never put them on my site!
The problem is, when I swore that, I was making the same mistake that you are here - assuming that I was the target and that everyone is like me. The reality is they are not, and these things work well. They're ubiquitous on ecommerce sites for a reason.
[+] [-] jrochkind1|2 years ago|reply
In the sites I interact with, that is probably the majority of these popups. You find them preferable?
I find them just as annoying and counter-productive as OP is describing.
For one thing, when your heuristics say I'm getting interested, that's when you decide to interrupt my attention? It's like they've intentionally decided to algorithmically make this as annoying as possible, when is the time we can interrupt the reader as annoyingly as we can?
And as you say, even if I've read 35% of an article or something, it may still be the first time I'm interacting with a site, and why do I want to give them my email address?
[+] [-] solarkraft|2 years ago|reply
They're arguably worse because it's a slap in the face while focusing on something.
[+] [-] lawkwok|2 years ago|reply
The signup field is a few paragraphs down the article and as you scroll to it, the article dims (but is still readable) and highlights the newsletter section. As you keep scrolling the the dimming fades out and you can read the article again.
This is much less jarring than a pop up and is placed after the reader gets to read at their pace.
[+] [-] sBqQu3U0wH|2 years ago|reply
Considering that the internet is almost unusable without an adblock, this does not surprise me at all.
[+] [-] brightball|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] quaintdev|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tmaly|2 years ago|reply
Does anyone test their websites anymore? Especially on mobile.
[+] [-] Suppafly|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tootie|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aimor|2 years ago|reply
Am I seeing double?: https://ibb.co/0y2xLWX
Web layouts have *evolved* in a bizarre way, especially when businesses are paying for results and the user experience comes second. Popups (or whatever the cute new euphemism is) are an easy way to add new garbage to a site while separating the garbage from the content. Cookie banners, logins, paywalls, and more!
https://ibb.co/yFb9QBd
[+] [-] DeusExMachina|2 years ago|reply
Disclaimer: I use them and so do many of my competitors.
"Does a poor job of increasing conversions" is the opinion of someone that has never looked at the data. You can be sure that the people interested in conversions run analytics and A/B testing on everything. If these pop-ups did a poor job and there was a better alternative, you can be sure that everyone would have already migrated to that alternative.
The "rule of seven" can also be used to counter her argument. That is precisely why businesses try to get the email of visitors: to have more interactions. Otherwise, for the vast majority of visitors, the first visit would be the only interaction they will ever have.
"Works against user goals" might be true for short term goals like jumping through the most amount of content. However, users have different goals and short-term ones are often not the best goals. A pop-up might address other long-term goals the visitor cares more about than going to yet another web page.
But more than anything, these pop-ups serve business goals because most of these websites exist only thanks to their revenue. Without them my business would probably not be viable. I assume that many accept the small annoyance of a pop-up as the cost of keeping the websites they like running. And if the pop-up appears when the user is about to close the window, it does not even stop a visitor in his tracks. He can still close the window without any extra click.
[+] [-] nicbou|2 years ago|reply
The main reason is that it's the only traffic that you own. It's not at the mercy of someone else's algorithm.
There are more answers in the thread I linked.
[+] [-] ffpip|2 years ago|reply
You are at the mercy of Gmail/Outlook's spam filtering algorithms
[+] [-] VinzO|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theshrike79|2 years ago|reply
Maybe if I see myself coming back to the site for insightful stuff, then I might consider a newsletter - but even that I'll subscribe to using my RSS reader (NewsBlur).
[+] [-] lloydatkinson|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thathndude|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drcongo|2 years ago|reply
[0] https://andybeaumont.com/post/the-value-of-content/
Edit: It seems the Tumblr is still up, just not with the custom domain - https://tcdr.tumblr.com
[+] [-] MattPalmer1086|2 years ago|reply
Lots of content out there. Very little I really have to read.
[+] [-] kermi|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ianai|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sparsely|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nicbou|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] idopmstuff|2 years ago|reply
This seems to really misunderstand things - if the customer has hit your website because they came to one of your SEO-optimized blog articles, there is a very solid chance they're not going to stumble upon your site again. The point of the newsletter conversion is to give you a chance to get those seven interactions.
[+] [-] datavirtue|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] boplicity|2 years ago|reply
Unfortunately, most websites require an actual business model to consistently produce content. Business models usually need a form of lead gathering, or audience building. (Which is, frankly, core to most businesses.)
If you don't want to engage with businesses, then there are still endless hobby websites out there that do little other than produce content for free, without any popups, ads, upsells, etc.
[+] [-] Jaygles|2 years ago|reply
There's a group of guys near where I live who stand around and hand CDs to tourists, and after a minute of chatting, start asking for "donations". It's the same vibe. Giving something of value to someone then using that to set the expectation that they should give something of value back. If you give something away, in my opinion, the transaction is complete. Trying to use that to get something in return is manipulative.
[+] [-] b3lvedere|2 years ago|reply
If they have a problem with that, it is totally in their legal right to try and do something about it.
Just as it is still totally in my legal right to consume (information) how i see fit. This may or may not involve legal workarounds.
I do not care if their business/earning model is not compatible with my method of consuming (information).
[+] [-] Karellen|2 years ago|reply
Links to external news articles are free for anyone to read, and for all account owners (paid or not) to comment on.
Featured articles by LWN's paid contributors are available for paid subscribers to read and comment on immediately, and for everyone else to read and for unpaid account owners to comment on between 7-14 days after first publication.[1] If you want to check out their past article quality, or just read interesting previous articles, you don't even need an account.
No pop-ups. No generic nag screens. If you're not a paid subscriber and you go to view an article you can't view yet, it tells you it's currently for subscribers only and how to get a subscription if you want one, but also tells you the date that the article will become free to read without a subscription.
Yes, I lurked for a few years before I became a paid member. Because I was able to read everything for free, the site built its reputation for me to the point where I was happy to subscribe to get those featured articles just a bit sooner. (And be able to participate in the comments in a timely fashion.)
[0] https://lwn.net/
[1] It's a bit complicated. Featured articles from throughout the week are collected every Thursday into the "Weekly Edition", and the Thursday after that that Weekly edition and all its articles are available for free.
[+] [-] nicbou|2 years ago|reply
As many people pointed out, if you don't fall into the sales funnel, the business does not care about you anyway.
Still, I wish that browsing the internet didn't feel like being a tourist in a bazaar.
[+] [-] wffurr|2 years ago|reply
You could probably get much higher conversion and lower unsubscribe rates by only going after readers who stuck around a bit.
[+] [-] jmbwell|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] asgerhb|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dreamcompiler|2 years ago|reply
Apparently retailers despise the fact that some customers prefer to buy things anonymously without being spammed or having their privacy invaded. I predict B&M stores will soon begin to block you at the front door until you give them your email address.
[+] [-] CPLX|2 years ago|reply
Like, it’s fine, go ahead, ask me. Make it obtrusive. Hell you can make it blink. But why can’t I look at it and just scroll by it. Just like put it on the fucking page it’s not hard.
[+] [-] ajsnigrutin|2 years ago|reply
Or admin@, info@, postmaster@, or something like that.
Hopefully it remembers "me" and doesn't bother me again.
[+] [-] sharemywin|2 years ago|reply
The exception is Free Tiers so they can convince they're bosses to use your enterprise tier.
[+] [-] ricardo81|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] timeon|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _dain_|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mp3geek|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] izzydata|2 years ago|reply
https://i.imgur.com/KOU98Bw.png
[+] [-] rchaud|2 years ago|reply
This has happened because Google, Facebook, Youtube and other walled gardens have locked up the online audience. If you clicked on a site, chances are you discovering it via one of the above. And chances are, you'll never see that site again if you close the tab. So that's the 'rule of 7' out the window right there.
If the popup converts even one person, that's better than it not being there at all.
"Yeah, but it's so annoying, I'll never subscribe via these tactics!" Congratulations, you are part of the rare few that know how the sausage is made. You probably also know that these modals aren't there for UX designers to praise or Substack to quake in their boots. They're there to convert.
[+] [-] simonsarris|2 years ago|reply
I love Substack but think this feature is ill-considered. I am sure it converts by the numbers, but I want 100% of my readers to have a pristine experience reading, foremost.
[+] [-] Tepix|2 years ago|reply
Perhaps we need a browser that uses AI to block all the annoying page elements?
Or we use crowd intelligence to achieve the task. If enough users flag the page elements that popup, and this data is shared, many could profit from a better experience.
[+] [-] asgerhb|2 years ago|reply