7 ms·

Paywall :( Perhaps a better way to earn money than tracking users.

simon_acca 8y ago
I didn't get paywalled, perhaps try incognito? EDIT: for clarification, I fully support paying for journalism, I am a subscriber of two online news outlets myself. My suggestion is provided "as is" without moral blessing of any kind, express or implied... ;)
- gameswithgo 8y ago
  wsj paywall depends on how many wsj articles you have viewed recently
  - marrone12 8y ago
    It's actually completely independent per user. They have a model that predicts whether or not you're more likely or less likely to subscribe and whether giving you a free preview will increase that chance.
- lbenes 8y ago
  It's a soft paywall. It's only triggered when an IP exceeds the monthly quota of free content. OP or someone on his subnet has been enjoying their journalism, but doesn't want to support it. It the post-truth world, I have no problem supporting these news organizations whose content I regularly consume.
war1025 8y ago
There are several ways to get around it. The one I usually go with is by pasting the link into the search box on archive.is
- paulcole 8y ago
  One of the cleverest hacks I've found to get around the WSJ paywall is to just give them a few dollars a week. Sneaky but it works! Edit: Downvoted for this lol. Can't believe paying for the content you want to read is such a controversial opinion.
  - shlorn 8y ago
    Any company that requires that I call an 800 number to cancel my subscription will never get a dollar from me again.
    - meritt 8y ago
      Glad I'm not the only one. NYTimes and SiriusXM are companies with solid products whom I refuse to do business with due to the hassle of cancellation. Meanwhile Netflix allows you to sign-up, cancel, or even temporarily pause your service without a single moment of hassle.
    - chrisbro 8y ago
      Amen, though once I called them it was pretty easy to get them to cancel me. SiriusXM, though...spent 25 minutes on the phone arguing with the rep that I didn't want to pay for their service anymore, in any fashion or form. I was begging them to let me cancel by the end of the call.
    - airstrike 8y ago
      I've cancelled two accounts with them before and never called an 800 number...
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - squeaky-clean 8y ago
    This is worth it if you read their content even slightly regularly. But I really only visit the WSJ when it's linked to me like on HN. I just checked my Chrome history and I've visited 10 articles total this year, counting this one. So $18.50 per month doesn't really seem worth it to me to read 2 articles a month.
andreygrehov 8y ago
https://outline.com/https://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-ceo-musk-says-company-is-flattening-management-structure-inreorganization-1526308678 https://outline.com/https://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-ceo-m...
- Luc 8y ago
  I'm fascinated by this outline.com. That's a pretty nice domain name... Nice bit of mental gymnastics going on in the DMCA page and in their Terms of Service - you, the user, are considered to be the publisher of this material. That way their hands stay clean! How could they possibly know you're NOT the publisher of Bloomberg and the WSJ? https://www.outline.com/dmca.html https://www.outline.com/dmca.html "If someone else might own the copyright to it, don't submit it. Outline is for reading pages that: you own the rights to, is in the public domain, constitutes fair use, or you have consent of the copyright holder. " https://www.outline.com/terms.html https://www.outline.com/terms.html '“you” or “publisher” means the individual or entity using the Services'
  - detaro 8y ago
    Pinterest does the same copyright gymnastics.
adjkant 8y ago
Try outline.com
Kalium 8y ago
Three business models have emerged for newspapers: * Be a sponsor's mouthpiece. This works pretty well if you're OK with your news being nothing more than someone's PR department. * Advertising. This, as you say, hinges entirely on tracking users. * Subscriptions. Also hinges on tracking users. In short, you're absolutely right! There could be a better way! I just don't know of any and can't think of any. I'm 100% convinced this failure of imagination is just my personal failing, through. I'm very interested in knowing what this better way could be, and I'm sure the news industry would similarly be deeply curious. What do you have in mind that's practical, workable, reliable enough to build a business around, and in no way, shape, form, or manner involves tracking users?
- dr_ 8y ago
  Charge me per article I want to read. 25 or 50 cents? Make it seamless so I can hit Apple Pay and then read the article. I would do it, and I bet so would many others.
  - AlimJaffer 8y ago
    I genuinely don't see many people doing it, at least not enough to make a tangible difference to the papers bottom line. The only answer these days is a subscription service, but I don't want to subscribe to 50+ different ones... be nice if there was a general 'internet' bill included in your ISP that distributed the money according to the sites you visited the most. Though that's a whole tracking/privacy problem once again.
    - redfern314 8y ago
      This is similar to the idea mentioned, but again... requires you to be logged in and tracked. I liked the first implementation of it, not sure about the current form. https://contributor.google.com/v/beta https://contributor.google.com/v/beta
  - gizmo385 8y ago
    This might have the effect of gating news coverage by income and prevent lower-income people from being able to access news.
fwdpropaganda 8y ago
Here's a Firefox addon that sets your referer to "Facebook" every time you connect to either the Financial Times or the Wall Street Journal. You won't get a paywall: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/read-ft-wsj/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/read-ft-wsj/

I didn't get paywalled, perhaps try incognito? EDIT: for clarification, I fully support paying for journalism, I am a subscriber of two online news outlets myself. My suggestion is provided "as is" without moral blessing of any kind, express or implied... ;)

gameswithgo 8y ago
wsj paywall depends on how many wsj articles you have viewed recently
- marrone12 8y ago
  It's actually completely independent per user. They have a model that predicts whether or not you're more likely or less likely to subscribe and whether giving you a free preview will increase that chance.
lbenes 8y ago
It's a soft paywall. It's only triggered when an IP exceeds the monthly quota of free content. OP or someone on his subnet has been enjoying their journalism, but doesn't want to support it. It the post-truth world, I have no problem supporting these news organizations whose content I regularly consume.

war1025 8y ago

There are several ways to get around it. The one I usually go with is by pasting the link into the search box on archive.is

paulcole 8y ago
One of the cleverest hacks I've found to get around the WSJ paywall is to just give them a few dollars a week. Sneaky but it works! Edit: Downvoted for this lol. Can't believe paying for the content you want to read is such a controversial opinion.
- shlorn 8y ago
  Any company that requires that I call an 800 number to cancel my subscription will never get a dollar from me again.
  - meritt 8y ago
    Glad I'm not the only one. NYTimes and SiriusXM are companies with solid products whom I refuse to do business with due to the hassle of cancellation. Meanwhile Netflix allows you to sign-up, cancel, or even temporarily pause your service without a single moment of hassle.
  - chrisbro 8y ago
    Amen, though once I called them it was pretty easy to get them to cancel me. SiriusXM, though...spent 25 minutes on the phone arguing with the rep that I didn't want to pay for their service anymore, in any fashion or form. I was begging them to let me cancel by the end of the call.
  - airstrike 8y ago
    I've cancelled two accounts with them before and never called an 800 number...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- squeaky-clean 8y ago
  This is worth it if you read their content even slightly regularly. But I really only visit the WSJ when it's linked to me like on HN. I just checked my Chrome history and I've visited 10 articles total this year, counting this one. So $18.50 per month doesn't really seem worth it to me to read 2 articles a month.

andreygrehov 8y ago

https://outline.com/https://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-ceo-musk-says-company-is-flattening-management-structure-inreorganization-1526308678 https://outline.com/https://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-ceo-m...

Luc 8y ago
I'm fascinated by this outline.com. That's a pretty nice domain name... Nice bit of mental gymnastics going on in the DMCA page and in their Terms of Service - you, the user, are considered to be the publisher of this material. That way their hands stay clean! How could they possibly know you're NOT the publisher of Bloomberg and the WSJ? https://www.outline.com/dmca.html https://www.outline.com/dmca.html "If someone else might own the copyright to it, don't submit it. Outline is for reading pages that: you own the rights to, is in the public domain, constitutes fair use, or you have consent of the copyright holder. " https://www.outline.com/terms.html https://www.outline.com/terms.html '“you” or “publisher” means the individual or entity using the Services'
- detaro 8y ago
  Pinterest does the same copyright gymnastics.

adjkant 8y ago

Try outline.com

Kalium 8y ago

Three business models have emerged for newspapers: * Be a sponsor's mouthpiece. This works pretty well if you're OK with your news being nothing more than someone's PR department. * Advertising. This, as you say, hinges entirely on tracking users. * Subscriptions. Also hinges on tracking users. In short, you're absolutely right! There could be a better way! I just don't know of any and can't think of any. I'm 100% convinced this failure of imagination is just my personal failing, through. I'm very interested in knowing what this better way could be, and I'm sure the news industry would similarly be deeply curious. What do you have in mind that's practical, workable, reliable enough to build a business around, and in no way, shape, form, or manner involves tracking users?

dr_ 8y ago
Charge me per article I want to read. 25 or 50 cents? Make it seamless so I can hit Apple Pay and then read the article. I would do it, and I bet so would many others.
- AlimJaffer 8y ago
  I genuinely don't see many people doing it, at least not enough to make a tangible difference to the papers bottom line. The only answer these days is a subscription service, but I don't want to subscribe to 50+ different ones... be nice if there was a general 'internet' bill included in your ISP that distributed the money according to the sites you visited the most. Though that's a whole tracking/privacy problem once again.
  - redfern314 8y ago
    This is similar to the idea mentioned, but again... requires you to be logged in and tracked. I liked the first implementation of it, not sure about the current form. https://contributor.google.com/v/beta https://contributor.google.com/v/beta
- gizmo385 8y ago
  This might have the effect of gating news coverage by income and prevent lower-income people from being able to access news.

fwdpropaganda 8y ago

Here's a Firefox addon that sets your referer to "Facebook" every time you connect to either the Financial Times or the Wall Street Journal. You won't get a paywall: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/read-ft-wsj/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/read-ft-wsj/