7 ms·

While I think these kind of posts are really fun to read, they should also mention little bit more about why these are paywalled. People needs to understand tha

While I think these kind of posts are really fun to read, they should also mention little bit more about why these are paywalled. People needs to understand that traditional newspaper is dying and in order to support real journalists, they need to make money. I am neither working for any news organisation nor talking about a specific news outlet. As far as I can see, they are trying hard not to annoy people but at the same time try to make some money for their work.

35bge57dtjku 9y ago
They don't get paid via ads like they used to?
- Rjevski 9y ago
  Most people block ads, as a side effect of the ads being nasty and irrelevant. Maybe they can start anew if they used bearable ads - something like The Deck (no affiliation, just an example).
- colejohnson66 9y ago
  People block ads. And for good reason. If a big website wants to make money from ads, they need to force the advertisers hand sometimes. OutBrain and Taboola are the worst.
- donohoe 9y ago
  Bear in mind ads is just one revenue stream. There are times that ad market has collapsed and prices dropped. Having a second (or more) reliable and recurring revenue stream makes solid business sense and allows them to move away from soem of the crappier ad practices.
tomjen3 9y ago
I am okay with that. The quality of news produced is already so low it doesn't matter.
- PietdeVries 9y ago
  With the real news gone, the fake news will no longer seem fake...
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
hueving 9y ago
Even with paid news, the NYTimes, WSJ, etc are using this new model of 'share-ability' to spread their articles in hopes of getting new subscribers. Unfortunately this means that they are still highly incentivized to generate click-bait and inflammatory articles. Better to write clap-trap for a single political view that will spread like wild fire in its echo chamber rather than a well-reasoned article properly contrasting the opposing viewpoints. People don't share articles that challenge them and their social circle, they share what they agree with.
- matt4077 9y ago
  These are all the headlines from https://www.wsj.com https://www.wsj.com as of right now. Please point out which you consider "click-bait" and/or "inflammatory": - Republicans Ditch Senate Health Bill, Plan Repeal Vote - Trump Certifies Iran Is Complying With Nuclear Deal - Trump Unveils Blueprint for Nafta - BNP Paribas Fined by Fed Over Currency Manipulation - Netflix Surprises With Big Subscriber Gains, Shares Soar - Activist Proxy Fight Puts Focus on P&G’s Cost-Cutting Effort - Proxy Fights Are a Rarity for Peltz’s Trian - Trian Launches Proxy Fight Against P&G - Artificial Intelligence Won’t Take Over Wall Street - U.K., EU Resume Brexit Talks - Bond Trading in Focus Ahead of Goldman Sachs Earnings - U.K. Inflation Eases Unexpectedly in June - What Macron Sees in Trump - The EU Needs to Get Tougher on Hezbollah - Why Europeans Oppose the Russia Sanctions Bill Unable to Buy U.S. Military Drones, Allies Place Orders With China
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - Pxtl 9y ago
    Meanwhile, on the WSJ Facebook Page: - The Trumps and the Truth - Millenials as seen by Corporate America - Trump administration slaps Iran with additional sanctions - Is Religion Still Tabboo? Not Everywhere - Pay for College Interns is so 2020 - "Cereal for lunch, candy with 'new flavors and textures,' selfie-friendly makeup: what CEOs believe millennials want" - Beachcombers Hunting for New York's Last Unspoiled Neighborhood Still some real stuff in there, but a lot more noise.
amelius 9y ago
I'm wondering what keeps e.g. Google from implementing micro-payments. If I can get access to an article or website for 20 cents by simply clicking a (universal) payment button, I would do so in many cases.
- xU1ppskunDmy6oz 9y ago
  Nothing is keeping them from doing it. They (and others, e.g. the Brave browser and Optimal) have been doing that for a while. Here are a few related links: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/21/google-contributor-pay-remove-ads https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/21/google-co... http://tech.firstpost.com/news-analysis/google-relaunches-contributor-to-help-users-browse-ad-free-pages-380150.html http://tech.firstpost.com/news-analysis/google-relaunches-co... https://blog.brave.com/introducing-brave-payments/ https://blog.brave.com/introducing-brave-payments/ https://medium.com/@robleathern/why-we-sold-optimals-technology-to-sovrn-b8bae5e4a014 https://medium.com/@robleathern/why-we-sold-optimals-technol...
- mason55 9y ago
  Sign up for Blendle. It's exactly what they do and all the big publishers are on board.
  - xU1ppskunDmy6oz 9y ago
    I wouldn't say it's exactly what they do. First of all, you end up reading the news through Blendle, where you have to see all kinds of news you don't want to see (in particular giving Blendle the opportunity to become a gigantic tracker); then (it's only available in a few countries so far) by far not all big publishers are on board, and finally it's not transparent how much of what you pay on Blendle makes it back to the original newspaper. edit: Having to go through the Blendle site also means if you're looking at an article on wsj.com from a few months ago you won't be able to jump to the Blendle version to the best of my knowledge. Archives aren't Blendle's thing. edit: Basically, I'd like to say: Don't sign up for Blendle.
    - 9y ago
ekianjo 9y ago
They can start a Patreon instead if they need support, instead of closing their site to the ones who pay only.
bigbugbag 9y ago
That's an interesting point of view, though it is not shared by everyone. I tend to agree with the point of view that investigative journalism died when newspapers got bought by a handful of ultra rich people from the 1% or is it 0.1%. Then there is the point of view that newspapers were dying even before the web and that it all started when newspaper got funded by including advertising. One way or the other I'd like to see how effective paywalls are at supporting investigative journalism.

35bge57dtjku 9y ago

They don't get paid via ads like they used to?

Rjevski 9y ago
Most people block ads, as a side effect of the ads being nasty and irrelevant. Maybe they can start anew if they used bearable ads - something like The Deck (no affiliation, just an example).
colejohnson66 9y ago
People block ads. And for good reason. If a big website wants to make money from ads, they need to force the advertisers hand sometimes. OutBrain and Taboola are the worst.
donohoe 9y ago
Bear in mind ads is just one revenue stream. There are times that ad market has collapsed and prices dropped. Having a second (or more) reliable and recurring revenue stream makes solid business sense and allows them to move away from soem of the crappier ad practices.

tomjen3 9y ago

I am okay with that. The quality of news produced is already so low it doesn't matter.

PietdeVries 9y ago
With the real news gone, the fake news will no longer seem fake...
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

hueving 9y ago

Even with paid news, the NYTimes, WSJ, etc are using this new model of 'share-ability' to spread their articles in hopes of getting new subscribers. Unfortunately this means that they are still highly incentivized to generate click-bait and inflammatory articles. Better to write clap-trap for a single political view that will spread like wild fire in its echo chamber rather than a well-reasoned article properly contrasting the opposing viewpoints. People don't share articles that challenge them and their social circle, they share what they agree with.

matt4077 9y ago
These are all the headlines from https://www.wsj.com https://www.wsj.com as of right now. Please point out which you consider "click-bait" and/or "inflammatory": - Republicans Ditch Senate Health Bill, Plan Repeal Vote - Trump Certifies Iran Is Complying With Nuclear Deal - Trump Unveils Blueprint for Nafta - BNP Paribas Fined by Fed Over Currency Manipulation - Netflix Surprises With Big Subscriber Gains, Shares Soar - Activist Proxy Fight Puts Focus on P&G’s Cost-Cutting Effort - Proxy Fights Are a Rarity for Peltz’s Trian - Trian Launches Proxy Fight Against P&G - Artificial Intelligence Won’t Take Over Wall Street - U.K., EU Resume Brexit Talks - Bond Trading in Focus Ahead of Goldman Sachs Earnings - U.K. Inflation Eases Unexpectedly in June - What Macron Sees in Trump - The EU Needs to Get Tougher on Hezbollah - Why Europeans Oppose the Russia Sanctions Bill Unable to Buy U.S. Military Drones, Allies Place Orders With China
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- Pxtl 9y ago
  Meanwhile, on the WSJ Facebook Page: - The Trumps and the Truth - Millenials as seen by Corporate America - Trump administration slaps Iran with additional sanctions - Is Religion Still Tabboo? Not Everywhere - Pay for College Interns is so 2020 - "Cereal for lunch, candy with 'new flavors and textures,' selfie-friendly makeup: what CEOs believe millennials want" - Beachcombers Hunting for New York's Last Unspoiled Neighborhood Still some real stuff in there, but a lot more noise.

amelius 9y ago

I'm wondering what keeps e.g. Google from implementing micro-payments. If I can get access to an article or website for 20 cents by simply clicking a (universal) payment button, I would do so in many cases.

xU1ppskunDmy6oz 9y ago
Nothing is keeping them from doing it. They (and others, e.g. the Brave browser and Optimal) have been doing that for a while. Here are a few related links: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/21/google-contributor-pay-remove-ads https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/21/google-co... http://tech.firstpost.com/news-analysis/google-relaunches-contributor-to-help-users-browse-ad-free-pages-380150.html http://tech.firstpost.com/news-analysis/google-relaunches-co... https://blog.brave.com/introducing-brave-payments/ https://blog.brave.com/introducing-brave-payments/ https://medium.com/@robleathern/why-we-sold-optimals-technology-to-sovrn-b8bae5e4a014 https://medium.com/@robleathern/why-we-sold-optimals-technol...
mason55 9y ago
Sign up for Blendle. It's exactly what they do and all the big publishers are on board.
- xU1ppskunDmy6oz 9y ago
  I wouldn't say it's exactly what they do. First of all, you end up reading the news through Blendle, where you have to see all kinds of news you don't want to see (in particular giving Blendle the opportunity to become a gigantic tracker); then (it's only available in a few countries so far) by far not all big publishers are on board, and finally it's not transparent how much of what you pay on Blendle makes it back to the original newspaper. edit: Having to go through the Blendle site also means if you're looking at an article on wsj.com from a few months ago you won't be able to jump to the Blendle version to the best of my knowledge. Archives aren't Blendle's thing. edit: Basically, I'd like to say: Don't sign up for Blendle.
  - 9y ago

ekianjo 9y ago

They can start a Patreon instead if they need support, instead of closing their site to the ones who pay only.

bigbugbag 9y ago

That's an interesting point of view, though it is not shared by everyone. I tend to agree with the point of view that investigative journalism died when newspapers got bought by a handful of ultra rich people from the 1% or is it 0.1%. Then there is the point of view that newspapers were dying even before the web and that it all started when newspaper got funded by including advertising. One way or the other I'd like to see how effective paywalls are at supporting investigative journalism.