ARCHIVES: This is legacy content from before Marketing Dive acquired Mobile Marketer in early 2017. Some information, such as publication dates, may not have migrated over. Check out the new Marketing Dive site for the latest marketing news.

Are publishers heading for an ad-free mobile future?

A quick look at most publisher mobile sites reveals a frightening picture: The scarcity of eye-catching, brand-friendly ads.

Not that this publication is going to out the publisher sites, but all those with skin in the game ought to spend an hour or so visiting their favorite mobile news sources and see if ads are integrated into the overall experience.

The danger is real. If consumers get used to a mobile news site without advertising, then that will be the standard expectation. And that will be disastrous for not just publishers, but also for mobile ad networks and ad agencies.

An easy parallel is the wired Web. Thank the smart publishers in the early 1990s who decided that all news should be free on the Internet. Trade those eyeballs for advertising, they said.

Well, it took 15 years or so for the chickens to come home to roost.

Most publishers, large and small, are worried sick about their future. If print-based, their circulation is down, advertising vanishing and news stolen by online aggregators. If online, the ad dollars simply cannot support the true costs of running a professional newsroom and ad sales department.

In essence, the wired Web cannibalized not just audience, but also circulation and advertising revenue.

No, there is no other business model waiting to be discovered, no matter what the talking heads, academics, service providers and media gurus have to say. Curated, edited content can be supported only in one or more of these ways: advertising, subscription or subsidies.

Paying for free
Mobile is not going to save publishing. Differentiated content is. But how much of the content we consume today in print, online, broadcast or mobile is unique? Commoditization is the real risk.

News Corp. chairman/CEO Rupert Murdoch recently said by next June consumers will have to pay to access his company's publications online. Good luck with that. The horse is already out the barn door. Consumers are way too attuned to accessing news for free online.

Yes, read your thoughts: The Wall Street Journal charges for online access. So does its direct competitor, Financial Times. They just so happen to be in a category that is not that commoditized. And even astute visitors to their sites will be able to nibble at the edges, reading some articles and watching videos for free.

What this proves is that even the Journal and FT realize that they need the draw of free content to attract advertising to support news sites that cannot survive solely on subscription legs.

Also, the online Journal and FT.com are highly subsidized by sourcing content produced by journalists who primarily work on the print side.

Some will argue that there are no divisions between online and print. Indeed, there may be none, eventually. But what if the salary and overhead costs had to be split evenly between online and print -- would that argument hold?

Mr. Murdoch's experiment of locking down content behind paid walls may not work. Readers will migrate to other rival sources of news, taking with them what advertisers desire most -- unique users for page impressions and click-throughs.

A Journal reader can easily whet her appetite by reading financial news and analysis on The New York Times' Web site at nytimes.com -- free at the moment -- or by visiting that excellent source of financial information, Yahoo Finance.

Maybe the Journal or FT columns are missing on other sites, but there are plenty of industry analysts out there willing to share their insights for free on blogs and portals such as Yahoo and MSN.

Niche with reach
Let's return to advertising. Not many news sites can claim total success with online advertising. The few success stories are narrowly focused news sites that match niche with reach.

A major challenge that generic news sites face is the growing concern over behavioral targeting from privacy advocates and federal regulators. Bet on some legislation that eventually will tie publishers' hands in the use of targeted advertising. Such a pity, especially if legitimate publishers who play by the rules have to suffer for the faults of the roguish few.

What's all this got to do with mobile?

Well, what happened to the wired Web is bound to cross over to the mobile Web.

Readers will expect content to be free. They will expect no advertising interruptions -- unless it is relevant or riveting. And advertisers will continue to have sky-high expectations of generating immediate leads versus growing the brand's trust with the reader over time with continued exposure to the ad.

Publishers must not fall into this folly of running mobile sites without ads. They must sell mobile inventory as part of an integrated package. Offer a few giveaways at first, if need be. But get the consumer used to seeing advertising and the advertiser used to paying for it.

In publishing, content should be free but not context.