Web-sites are better if you use an ad blocking service. Sure, some sites like the Wall Street Journal won't let you read content with an ad-blocker enabled unle

Web-sites are better if you use an ad blocking service. Sure, some sites like the Wall Street Journal won't let you read content with an ad-blocker enabled unless you're a paying subscriber, but I can almost always get similar content elsewhere. But yes, that's one of the problems with taking one form of medium (a physical newspaper) and abstracting it into a new format. When the original Windows came out, they had to figure out which low-res icons would most accurately represent their real-world counterparts. But that was decades ago. Now, things (icons, UI, design) are more symbolic of what we want to do, not the way they were. I feel like newspapers, sometimes, try to keep their newspaper look and feel, all the while, adding a crap-ton of useless content. I'm there for an article, not for all the rest of it. I have a few friends who work in the news(paper) industry, and I know that the job of photographer, in some newsrooms, has also taken on the role of web-developer, and even reporter. I mean, you're on the scene taking pictures, why not ask questions too? A difficult job made more difficult by lowering circulation levels, and lower budgets. So I guess the best way to encourage good on-line news is to subscribe to the digital formats, and let them know when they aren't doing their job?