by Mike Masnick
Tue, Mar 18th 2008 3:14pm
Here at Techdirt we have over ten years worth of content, all available for anyone to read, and as we certainly get a fair amount of traffic to those back archives. While we don't pay that much attention to ad revenues (our business isn't advertising), access to those archives (mainly from Google searches or links from other sites into a specific older story) represent a fair chunk of our page views and ad revenue. With that in mind, it's been quite surprising to see so many publications try to lock up their archives -- either (worst of all!) taking down old stories completely or trying to lock them up behind a pay wall. Luckily, it looks like more and more publications are recognizing that this is a bad business strategy. The article is in the NY Times, which only recognized this very issue a few months ago. Prior to that, it charged for access to its archives, but since opening it up has seen traffic shoot up and ad revenues appear to be following. The article also mentions how Newsweek has had a lot of success opening up its archive, and Sports Illustrated is getting set to make its own archive available later this week. For all of those publishers who worry that there isn't enough ad revenue online, it makes little sense to sit on so much inventory. These days, you need to work on using Google to help drive more traffic, not suing it to stop sending traffic. What better way to make money off your archive than getting a lot more people to look at it?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- This Week In Techdirt History: May 3rd - 9th
- DailyDirt: Problems With Peer Reviewed Publications
- [Updated] Ancestry.com Employees Caught Throwing Away
Thousands OfRecords They Were Supposed To Be Archiving For The US Government
- DailyDirt: Peer Reviewed Publications Are Everywhere
- Two And A Half Years Later, Verizon Finally Lets People Opt Out Of Its Stealth Zombie Cookie