Selling advertisers on reader attention, not clicks

First came clickbait. Now comes engagement.

Disillusioned with page views as a reliable metric of their ads' effectiveness, advertisers are increasingly demanding to know whether readers stick around long enough to actually see their online ads. Publishers — as if the need to pursue clicks and Facebook "virality" wasn't stressful enough — implore their troops to post stories that might actually be read, preferably all the way to the end.

The Economist, Gawker, Forbes and the Financial Times are among some notable names in the online publishing business starting to rethink the way they present their content and sell their ads, focusing on the amount of time spent on their content by readers. To be sure, no one wants less traffic. But some news outlets are starting to pitch "audience attention" as a selling point in response to skepticism from advertisers about clicks and as a self-serving way to stand out among the hundreds of millions of websites.

Among the means publishers employ to keep readers reading: leaving their more compelling content on the site longer; creating clutter-free website designs to make it easier to find the best material; posting more quizzes; using prominent "embeds" of videos, links and tweets in stories; assigning longform articles; creating never-ending pages that just scroll on with more content loads; showcasing photo galleries that stay on one long page rather than flipped pages.

"The (media) buyers are feeling the inefficiencies of regular banner ads and are now primarily looking at ways to engage the reader more with the brand," says Sandy Rubinstein, CEO of ad agency DXagency. "Yesterday's tricks don't work tomorrow. We need to keep changing, and digital offers such a unique vantage point in that it's so nimble. We can try something today and see in real time if it works."

The idea has been gaining traction for months as some early adapting publishers have touted audience engagement as a powerful tool for selling ads. Recent developments — including advertisers' growing disdain for banner ads that are never seen or clicked on — suggest the idea may be catching on at an accelerating pace.

Last month, Google issued a report that said 56% of ads it serves aren't "viewable," a term that suggests ads are too far down on the site or that readers aren't scrolling down far enough. The result reinforced the notion that display ads are deeply flawed, says Jonah Goodhart, CEO of ad tech firm Moat. (USA TODAY is a client of Moat.)

"Advertisers want the time and attention of the right audience to get the right message across," says Tony Haile, CEO of web traction research firm Chartbeat, who's been one of the loudest proponents of the quality-over-quantity approach. "To date, they've been given proxies like page views and click-through rates. We should value and deliver exactly what they want: (readers') time and attention."

SEEKING SUPER JOURNALISTS

This month, Gawker– known for aggregating and respinning highly viral stories with its own sharp voice – told readers its front page will be updated less often to give selected stories longer shelf life on its most prominent piece of real estate.

Borrowing a retro play from newspapers, Gawker said its main page will be used more like a front page, displaying what its editors consider to be the best reported or simply most engaging stories — the ones often lost in the shuffle because of a constant flow of new posts.

In the new arrangement, the highlighted front-page stories will be accompanied by larger images and headlines. Other stories will be placed on "sub-blogs" that pertain to the story topic – a tech story on Valleywag.com, for example.

"Traffic will take a hit," Gawker editor in chief Max Read says. "Page views is one measure, but it doesn't tell the whole story."

Lewis DVorkin, chief product officer for Forbes, wrote this month that contributors to the business news and commentary site are measured on several data points, including how much time readers spend on posts, the percentage of author pages that readers scroll and how fast — and far down — readers read their pages. Dvorkin said the writers " should get rewarded for those stories that run ads that are seen for long periods of time."

Last year, the Financial Times made headlines by announcing its plans to charge for ads based on the amount of time spent on content. The FT has argued that its readers generally stick around longer on individual stories and that its ad fees should reflect this advantage.

Jon Slade, commercial director of digital advertising for the Financial Times, told blog Contently that its readers spend six times more time on the FT than on similar business sites. "Logic would say: Let's start to value the amount of time spent with a brand," he told Contently.

In a partnership with Moat, The Economist is pursuing a similar strategy. Late last year, the venerable U.K. business magazine launched its "TimeGuarantee" campaign that promises advertisers that viewers will stay longer on pages that showcase their ads.

For The Economist's digital editions, TimeGuarantee promises that readers will cumulatively spend more than 250 hours — up to 700 hours in some cases — on pages that contain advertisers' ads.

Some publishers "are making the argument to advertisers: Do you want more attentive viewers?" Goodhart says. "More attentive viewers will lead to more exposure time" for their ads.

The rising influence of mobile is a factor, says Teal Newland, vice president of global revenue and marketing at content recommendation site StumbleUpon. Contrary to perceptions of the small screen's shortcomings, readers on smartphones have shown a willingness to keep their eyes glued to compelling content, particularly as phones get bigger.

"Traditionally, mobile was seen as a place to jump in and jump out," she says. "But we see that mobile users are spending more time on content, sometimes longer than desktop."

Contributing: Emma Hinchliffe