Introducing Pay or Consent on Mumsnet

[BeckyAMumsnet]

Hello everyone.

We wanted to give you a heads-up about a change in the way we deal with cookie consent. We are introducing a Pay or Consent model, giving you two different options to continue accessing the site:

1. Continue for free with cookies and ads: this is the option that most people have enabled already.
2. Subscribe to Mumsnet Premium: For those who prefer an ad-free experience with no cookies/tracking for ad purposes - Besides ad-free you’ll also get first access to our product tests plus all revenues from Premium are put towards our campaigning work

Why are we making this change?

The pay or consent model is becoming increasingly common across online platforms as publishers adapt to changes in advertising levels and data privacy regulations. Like many other publishers, we relied on advertising to generate income but changes in tracking regulation and the growing use of ad blockers have made this model less viable.

We know that Mumsnet is an essential space for many - a place to seek advice, find support, and connect with your fellow Mumsnetters. That’s why we’re committed to ensuring that the site remains free at the point of use for anyone who needs it but it’s not fair that those who install ad blockers or rejected cookies are piggy backing on the back of other users who haven’t.

At the same time as introducing this, we’re going to reduce the price of Mumsnet Premium to £2.99 a month because we want to be fair to those who’d rather not accept advertising cookies. This is less than the cost of a flat white a month from most decent coffee shops and we very much hope you think Mumsnet’s worth it! Nb anyone who’s signed up to Mumsnet Premium already at the previous price (£4.99 per month) will have their payments reduced within the next week or so.

We’ll be here to answer any questions you may have. Thank you, as always, for supporting Mumsnet.

I’m still here, ad blocker still on and all cookies rejected (in Settings, after clicking accept on the “pay for no ads” pop up).

I’m actually doing this as an experiment to see if the functionality matches the policy statement. I’m happy to be told I can’t use the site with an ad blocker, and I know other sites manage to do it.

Extra functionality @HotCrossBunplease as you get your posts posted twice

Ha ha double the piggybacking!

Mine is working still

The ads on the video site Dailymotion are atrocious, could induce epilipsy. Similarly upsetting as the MN ads.
My main issue with MN ads are the effect they have on my eyes, it is actually uncomfortable for me physically. Perhaps MN would prefer I try some CBT and stop shirking

If you google (via Chrome) how to use Dailymotion with an ad blocker it suggest extensions to over ride it. Same applies here if you are using Chrome.

I am on Premium, @DJrocks, and I have had awful problems with MN crashing and freezing - sorry. I use Safari on my iPad, and I think it was the two latest updates that caused all the problems - iOS 18.1.1 and iOS18.1.2, I think.

I even have a new iPad, and it still had the same issues on Safari, so I have switched to Firefox, and it behaves impeccably now.

I'm sorry I haven't RTFT but the way you (MNHQ) perceive your users who create your content, is pretty ungrateful

but it’s not fair that those who install ad blockers or rejected cookies are piggy backing on the back of other users who haven’t.

I think I've brought some traffic to MN as well as providing content that has turned out to be politically influential. I think financially Mumsnet will have gained from my being here rather than otherwise.

I still can't subscribe to Premium because due to data breaches in the past I cannot trust MN with information which would link my user name to my real life identity.

It's enlightening to know that I am considered a freeloader.

Not in my eyes, @TinselAngel.

I think a day of mass deleting accounts would be a thing to organise.

If even 5% of their user base all deleted their accounts in a particular day,they would notice.

No users, no content that advertiser's would like to advertise on.

Ooft

That’s why we’re committed to ensuring that the site remains free at the point of use for anyone who needs it but it’s not fair that those who install ad blockers or rejected cookies are piggy backing on the back of other users who haven’t

I've not RTFT yet but I'm getting my popcorn out for this one 😁🍿

I'd certainly get a lot more done if that was the case 😁

I pay for my Premium with one of those pre-paid debit cards that doesn't have your name on it that you buy from the Post Office to go on holiday, and type nonsense into the postcode box. So far, it's worked.

ETA: sorry, I went into problem-solving mode by default there.

Given your informative contributions on FWR concerning the "Malaga Airport" phenomenon amongst middle-aged men, based on your personal experiences; the support you've given to other women facing stbxHs "discovering their true selves"; and yes, the political lobbying you've done to protect the spousal exit clause, I dissent with MNHQ that you are any kind of freeloader.

exactly ! well said!

I’ve been having the same issues with Safari but yesterday I made a few changes under the app settings and since then…no freezing, no reloading and no adverts at all.

It's enlightening to know that I am considered a freeloader.

Indeed!

In case the end comes quickly I feel compelled to plead my own non-freeloader case … Amongst my multiple usernames I chose to respond to this thread using this one because I was using it when I successfully advocated for MNHQ to start a Mature Study and Retraining board. (It’s thriving - though I wish MNHQ would give it a tiny bit of promotion.) I am slightly proud of that - and combined with my dedicated posting elsewhere I do feel I’ve earned my keep.

Anyway - I’ve been called much worse names over the years! I guess it’s easy enough to brush off given how much I’ve learnt and how much fun I have here.

We’re still bearing with you @MNHQ but the waiting is getting quite boring now.

FYI Ad blocker still working and all cookies firmly rejected so assuming this means that the new policy isn’t in place yet?

I couldn't see anywhere MNHQ staff had actually used the term 'freeloader'.
'Piggybacking' was the word, I think? ... well, I guess that's not good if it's like the Old Man of the Sea in Sinbad, a dead weight of no positive value. But rather different if it's someone that people are happy to give a free ride to. There are a few very valuable contributors thinking of leaving which would be a hell of an own goal.

Well I've had a lovely break from Mumsnet while I tried to navigate this.
In the end I had no choice but to consent, because the paywall wouldn't allow me to look at the terms and conditions for Premium.
In terms of deleting accounts, I wonder what would happen if I asked Mumsnet to 'forget me' as permitted under GDPR. Would all my content disappear as well?

@ErrolTheDragon I don’t think ‘Unfair Piggy-backer on the Backs of Others’ is a terribly kind thing to be called after considerably more than a decade of interaction.

I won’t claim my feelings are hurt - but I was a little surprised.

"Freeloader" has been used in previous similar messages about people using adblockers.

the simple truth is that those who use ad blockers are free riding off those who don't

Is the actual quote from Justine, back in 2017, on this thread

I can't disagree with that from a monetary standpoint.
But it's a bit 'knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing'... from another perspective, lurkers are freeloading off people who put time and effort into posts.
If I don't feel a cap fits I don't feel obliged to wear it.

I think it's the end for me too; o way am I paying £2.99/month for this crappy app.

So they have been vocally unhappy about use of ad blockers since 2017? Why not just block users who use them then? Loads of sites do.

I’ve generally proceeded on the basis that if a site lets you in while you have one enabled, that’s on them and they must have built it into their calculations. But to be honest it was the sudden vitriol against those who disable cookies that was the real surprise, given that every site has to offer the opportunity to do that.

I don’t understand why they couldn’t just have introduced the policy in a neutral way.