It must work. And they must believe “working” is the most important thing. Why else would website owners ask me to sign up for their email newsletter before I have even seen their site?
You know the pages I am talking about. They are entirely obscured by a demand, a plea, or an invitation to subscribe.
I usually arrive at these sites after having followed a link from another site I trust. The context of that link led me to believe I would find valuable information there. But the domain is usually unknown.
While I want to read their article or story, I am prevented from doing so – at least momentarily – by an overlay or popup. It contains a field where I can enter my email address to receive a weekly or monthly email.
How can I possibly commit to this subscription when I don’t know who you are or what you believe? You haven’t allowed me to read anything yet. I can’t commit to subscribing, because I can’t even promise I will finish this article!
May I suggest an alternative?
Site owners could allow new visitors to read the page. At the bottom, they could briefly describe themselves, offer a series of relevant links, and tell us about their newsletter, only then including a subscription box.
I know several popular platforms have built their businesses using the other method. I can only imagine the “sign up now and read later” types must be numerous enough to justify it.
For nearly twenty years I have been neck-deep in web analytics and user data. I know clickbait headlines can be justified by data. I know popups and intrusive advertisements can be justified by data. I know SPAM can even be justified by data.
Publishers shouldn’t look for justification. We should treat users how we want to be treated, in spite of the data.