This Slate article addresses the practice of some news organizations of making users click to several separate pages to continue reading articles.
Some websites mandate that articles be split into separate pages once pass a certain number of words; at Slate, for instance, the limit is 1,000.
Because of the opportunity to maximise clicks, these organizations are hanging on to this model, much to the chagrin of users, myself included.
The piece highlights a problem that is experienced by readers, not just of sites that feature long form articles; sometimes even shorter pieces are split up, which can be bring real annoyance.
Getting readers to continue reading to the end a story has always been an issue, even for traditional newspapers with jump pages.
On the Internet, with people's attention spans diminishing almost daily, this model should not have survived this long.
News organizations would do well to think past their advertising revenue, and really consider the strength of their content, and if it's good enough to hold readers attention through multiple clicks.
As journalists, if the organizations we work for do employ this practice, then as we write we should be thinking, is this work powerful enough to get readers to click through six pages to the end?
As news consumers, what is the maximum number of clicks are you willing to make to get to the end of an article?