3 ms·

That's the problem with journalism today though. With ad based revenue platforms, a view is a view. The content itself doesn't matter, only a headline that make

by jjcm 9y ago

That's the problem with journalism today though. With ad based revenue platforms, a view is a view. The content itself doesn't matter, only a headline that makes views does. I really want to see a subscription system that rewards quality over just views.

IgorPartola 9y ago
Get the New York Times? No seriously, there are long form publications that provide what you want with the model you want. I like Gizmodo. They do some interesting pieces once in a while. But I don't see myself paying $5/month for it. I am not a fan of advertising as a model for the web. It sucks in terms of UX, and it sucks in terms of motivations for the content providers. This is how we get WikiHow and W3School, and Wikipedia clones. Problem is that it's a model that's simply more profitable than anything else we've tried so far. And you can shame people into paying or try to coax them all you want, but it just won't make as much money.
- andrewstuart2 9y ago
  This is one of the reasons I gladly pay for a LWN subscription. I'd love to see more journalism like that, where insiders are paid a small fee to write articles about subjects they're already experts on. But then again, my interests are much less in world events or pop culture, and much more in science and engineering, where expertise is more easily measured.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
ucaetano 9y ago
> I really want to see a subscription system that rewards quality over just views. That's called exactly that, subscription. If you like a news source, subscribe to it and pay the subscription. I could get most of the content of The Economist and the NYT for free, but I subscribe to both.
cocktailpeanuts 9y ago
I would like to believe so too, but if you look at what these subscription based media are writing you'll soon realize they are not free from this either. Subscription based sites are afraid that they will lose their existing use base if they talk about something their users won't like that they tilt towards writing about what their users want to hear. For example, everyone knows that most mainstream media sites tilt heavily towards left to the point where it's not objective anymore and closer to propaganda. The problem is much deeper than you think. It's not just about ad vs subscription. It's the fact that you can't make enough money with media nowadays regardless of whether it's ad or subscription. Because they don't make enough money but they want to, they end up making bad decisions to extract as much of their reader's attention out to money as possible.

by jjcm 9y ago

IgorPartola 9y ago

Get the New York Times? No seriously, there are long form publications that provide what you want with the model you want. I like Gizmodo. They do some interesting pieces once in a while. But I don't see myself paying $5/month for it. I am not a fan of advertising as a model for the web. It sucks in terms of UX, and it sucks in terms of motivations for the content providers. This is how we get WikiHow and W3School, and Wikipedia clones. Problem is that it's a model that's simply more profitable than anything else we've tried so far. And you can shame people into paying or try to coax them all you want, but it just won't make as much money.

andrewstuart2 9y ago
This is one of the reasons I gladly pay for a LWN subscription. I'd love to see more journalism like that, where insiders are paid a small fee to write articles about subjects they're already experts on. But then again, my interests are much less in world events or pop culture, and much more in science and engineering, where expertise is more easily measured.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

ucaetano 9y ago

> I really want to see a subscription system that rewards quality over just views. That's called exactly that, subscription. If you like a news source, subscribe to it and pay the subscription. I could get most of the content of The Economist and the NYT for free, but I subscribe to both.

cocktailpeanuts 9y ago

I would like to believe so too, but if you look at what these subscription based media are writing you'll soon realize they are not free from this either. Subscription based sites are afraid that they will lose their existing use base if they talk about something their users won't like that they tilt towards writing about what their users want to hear. For example, everyone knows that most mainstream media sites tilt heavily towards left to the point where it's not objective anymore and closer to propaganda. The problem is much deeper than you think. It's not just about ad vs subscription. It's the fact that you can't make enough money with media nowadays regardless of whether it's ad or subscription. Because they don't make enough money but they want to, they end up making bad decisions to extract as much of their reader's attention out to money as possible.