Dash has repeatedly and correctly pointed out that Readability is
not the only company to derive revenue from a read-it-later
service. Competitors Instapaper and Pocket do much the same thing
for their users. On the face of it Readability, which tried to
compensate publishers, should be more popular with authors than
competitors who make no attempt to do so. Right?
Wrong. It turns out that many authors care less about the money,
and more about the fact that Readability is representing them
without their consent. As a publisher, I understand this reaction
and it isn’t entirely rational. Even if the financial outcomes
were equivalent for Readability and Instapaper, and even if the
user experiences they offered were identical, I would find it
easier to accept Instapaper deriving direct benefit from someone
buying their app than to accept Readability deriving benefit from
collecting revenue on my behalf.