‘Transparency first’: Publishers align subscription practices more closely with their editorial promises

Publishers are becoming more transparent and direct about their subscription products and practices as aggressive acquisition and retention tactics threaten to undermine their editorial credibility.

Marketing hacks, convoluted terms and conditions, and laborious cancellation processes may help boost subscription revenue in the short term, but some publishers worry they damage reputations and brands. The risk is particularly acute for news publishers, which often position their subscription products around transparency and accountability but have at times fallen short of those ideals with their commercial operations.

Major news publishers are now reworking their subscription approaches to add transparency, clarity, and flexibility. This often means shelving gimmicky conversion tactics, making cancellation simpler and easier, and handing greater control to subscribers.

These efforts are intensifying as regulatory scrutiny of subscription practices mounts and transparency is seen as a competitive differentiator. With trust in media declining and an eventful global news cycle on the horizon, publishers say it’s becoming increasingly important to align their subscription practices with their editorial promises and standards.

“How can we expect subscribers to take our editorial seriously if we’re playing games with simple things like pricing and payment terms?” said a consumer revenue head at a U.S.-based news publication, who asked not to be identified by name.

In the past year, this publisher has simplified subscription offers and promotions to make clear to subscribers what they will be charged for and when. It’s also added additional renewal reminders to reduce unexpected charges. “If people want to leave us, we’d rather they do it on good terms and know we’re here for them when they’re ready to come back,” the executive said.

Other major news publishers are making similar adjustments as audience expectations change.

“2024 will be a consequential year for democracy, and there’s a huge opportunity for trusted publishers to be a source of truth. At the FT, we’re putting trust and transparency first – not only with our gold-standard journalism but also throughout the customer experience,” the Financial Times’ managing director of consumer revenue, Fiona Spooner, told Toolkits.

The FT is updating its account management mechanisms to make it easier for subscribers to pause, cancel, and renew their subscriptions on a self-service basis. It’s also planning to offer more packages and subscription types for users to switch between, based on their needs and interests. “It’s our responsibility to ensure customers don’t feel trapped into subscription cycles they don’t want,” Spooner said.

The Guardian shares similar sentiments and hopes transparency and accountability will help grow its base of recurring donors. Using data and technology to enhance users’ experience instead of exploiting them is crucial, according to its senior vice president of growth, Emilie Harkin.

“We know the importance of being a media company that people can trust. We earn that trust by publishing reliable and credible journalism, of course, but also by treating readers and supporters with respect and care,” Harkin told Toolkits. “As the subscription economy becomes increasingly crowded… respecting our audiences will become ever more important.”

Transparency as a competitive edge

Publishers have historically avoided transparency with their audiences, largely because their business models have often revolved around cramming as many ads onto readers’ screens as possible, harvesting and selling their data to third parties, and obfuscating their incentives and interests.

As publishers shift towards subscriptions and audience revenue, many believe transparency across all aspects of their businesses could give them a competitive advantage. This belief is driven by business interests rather than moral obligation but it may be a positive step towards aligning publishers and audiences in more respectful and sustainable relationships.

“We’ll probably never see an end to gimmicks to push subscriptions, but in a business where trust is at a premium, I think publishers will increasingly look to push subscriptions in ways that build trust – or at least don’t erode it,” said Steve Hayes, editor and chief executive officer of politics and policy publication The Dispatch. 

“There are, of course, dozens of things that contribute to a successful subscription publishing business. But nothing matters more than understanding subscriptions and memberships as relationships rather than mere transactions,” he added.

A new breed of independent publishers is hoping to compete with larger, established competitors by prioritizing transparency in their business models and communicating clearly with audiences about their strategies and motivations.

One example is 404 Media — a publication covering technology and the Internet — which implemented a registration wall on its website last month requiring readers to share their email addresses to read most articles. In a post explaining the change, 404 said the “vast, vast majority” of its revenue comes from paid subscribers, and collecting email addresses is the best way to persuade more people to subscribe.

A shift towards transparency may help some publishers but hurt others. It’s bad news for those that have failed to generate significant demand for their subscription products, for example, and those reliant on aggressive retention tactics and sleeper subscribers to maintain subscription revenues.

Carrot or stick?

Publishers aren’t embracing transparency entirely of their own accord. As consumers become familiar with subscription models, their tolerance for shady tactics is diminishing, and publishers are being forced to adjust.

Class-action lawsuits targeting publishers’ subscription practices are on the rise in the U.S., and regulators and lawmakers globally are proposing or enforcing new rules and requirements for subscription-based businesses. Meanwhile, more people are using tools to track and manage subscriptions and — in some cases — cancel them on their behalf.

Publishers are being forced to be more transparent and direct with their audiences whether they like it or not as consumers gain more control. Some hope that scrutiny and regulation will ultimately benefit their long-term interests as it becomes clear that trapping customers in unwanted subscriptions is not a viable strategy.

Publishers are facing similar challenges in their advertising businesses, too, with major technology shifts such as the deprecation of third-party cookies threatening to significantly impact their ability to generate revenue.

“Transparency is the emergent strategy in this season of online advertising,” Snopes chief revenue officer Justin Wohl wrote in a recent opinion piece. Publishers will need to convince users to authenticate in order to monetize them effectively with advertising, and tracking and targeting audiences without their knowledge will no longer be a viable option.

“Publishers should tell their readers that by authenticating, they are helping to fund the content they know and love. Strategic and creative publishers will succeed at clearly communicating this message and reap the benefits,” he wrote.

In it for the long haul

Evolving consumer demand is prompting publishers to take a broader and more realistic view of their relationships with audiences. Publishers increasingly acknowledge that large portions of their audiences will dip in and out of subscriptions as needs and interests change and that it’s in their best interests to embrace that reality.

The definitions of “subscribed” and “non-subscribed” are becoming more nuanced as it becomes clear that large portions of audiences will have intermittent paying relationships with publishers that fall between those two states. At the same time, the concept of lifecycle management is broadening to factor in revenue from other sources and create a more holistic view of individuals’ commercial relationships with publishers’ brands.

In that context, financially able news publishers say they’re prioritizing audience trust over the long term, which they believe will enable them to maximize revenue throughout consumers’ lifetimes – whether through subscriptions, advertising, commerce, licensing, or other means.

“Subscription publishers are now in it for the long haul. The days of the Trump Bump and the heady search-and-social spikes are over, and that’s good news for those of us still in the game, said Julia Beizer, the chief digital officer at Bloomberg Media. “Instead of focusing on acquisition above all, we can put our efforts into the hard, sometimes-unglamorous work that goes into any long-term relationship: learning about our users, meeting their needs, repeating.”