Instead of putting it all one page or even using an AJAX call to retrieve each list entry, the entries each load a new page, complete with ads, etc. A lot of these are butt slow in loading just one page, but hey, they just want those clicks.
So they manage to stretch one lame article into 10 page views, complete with 10x the ad revenue and 10x the latency for the reader. On mobile, this can be even more painful.
Its an executive decision designed to hinder use. They dont want you doing something obvious like reading content. They want you looking at all the other pages they have to offer where you also cannot read content.
They also think: "Wouldn't the world be nicer without these people who want to read our content over the internet."
And they also think "OK the guy who followed the link has an iPad so he isn't among the cheapest bastards of all those who follow links to our glorious magazine, so let's try to make them subscribe."
Anybody has any statistics that supports or disproves the above ideas?
The problem is, most developers/designers get saddled with tasks like this, and they think, "I fucking hate that I even have to do this in the first place -- why would I spend another goddamn second on it?" And they leave it the shitty experience that they know their superiors will sign off on.
Like any other job your results are only as good as the pride you put into it.