4 ms·

I think it's worth paying for good quality journalism. It's nice to support the institutions that serve a vital role to the checks and balances of our democracy

by sk55 7y ago

I think it's worth paying for good quality journalism. It's nice to support the institutions that serve a vital role to the checks and balances of our democracy. Also, some of you may not know it but you can access the news for free through your local library. For example, I get the NY Times online via the Santa Clara County Library.

kelnos 7y ago
I agree with that in general, but which site or sites? I honestly don't read any particular news source enough to justify giving them as much as they ask. The intro rates seem to be pretty low for many, but then after 3 or 6 months they bump up to $15-$30/mo. I can't justify spending that much to read even 5-10 articles per month per site.
borski 7y ago
I did not know this! I would totally do this instead of going around them! Do you have more info on this? (I do pay for those I really like, but for those in which I only read an occasional article or two, I don’t particularly feel like subscribing)
- sk55 7y ago
  Here are the details for Santa Clara County Library https://sccld.org/emagazines-news/?_ga=2.59104363.719460146.1581470184-1919441446.1580196296 https://sccld.org/emagazines-news/?_ga=2.59104363.719460146....
AndrewUnmuted 7y ago
This is a link aggregation service, though. The OP is not really weighing in on the value of pay walls, nor whether or not they actually ensure "good journalism." The issue being raised here is that posting pay-walled links increases friction for, I would imagine, the overwhelming majority of users of the site. I wouldn't expect people from, say, India, or even Brazil, to be able to get the NYT from their public libraries. They have their own newspapers to subsidize.
madsbuch 7y ago
That is a good point, but in my opinion outside of the scope of HN. If your argument should be applicable for content posted on a link aggregator followers should either subscripe to everything, turning the link aggregator into a money cow, or they will hit the wall so often that the aggregator becomes futile.
michaelmrose 7y ago
New York times, forbes, Washington post, wall street journal 600 a year. Median individual income in the United States is $865. If you are a highly paid engineer imagine writing a check for 3k for news. Poorer people could use the library if they had time between their 2 jobs.
GoodJokes 7y ago
Ok, but quality journalism is, uh, not the NYT or WaPo. They sold themselves out awhile ago. I guess you can claim some performative woke points for it though.
masonic 7y ago
Many of the major news sites in the USA are also available for free when on Starbucks Wi-Fi.
juststeve 7y ago
this is fine, but it's expensive to subscribe to all major news sites in the world.
113 7y ago
I would be fine with paying for good quality journalism, none of it is though.

by sk55 7y ago

kelnos 7y ago

I agree with that in general, but which site or sites? I honestly don't read any particular news source enough to justify giving them as much as they ask. The intro rates seem to be pretty low for many, but then after 3 or 6 months they bump up to $15-$30/mo. I can't justify spending that much to read even 5-10 articles per month per site.

borski 7y ago

I did not know this! I would totally do this instead of going around them! Do you have more info on this? (I do pay for those I really like, but for those in which I only read an occasional article or two, I don’t particularly feel like subscribing)

sk55 7y ago
Here are the details for Santa Clara County Library https://sccld.org/emagazines-news/?_ga=2.59104363.719460146.1581470184-1919441446.1580196296 https://sccld.org/emagazines-news/?_ga=2.59104363.719460146....

AndrewUnmuted 7y ago

This is a link aggregation service, though. The OP is not really weighing in on the value of pay walls, nor whether or not they actually ensure "good journalism." The issue being raised here is that posting pay-walled links increases friction for, I would imagine, the overwhelming majority of users of the site. I wouldn't expect people from, say, India, or even Brazil, to be able to get the NYT from their public libraries. They have their own newspapers to subsidize.

madsbuch 7y ago

That is a good point, but in my opinion outside of the scope of HN. If your argument should be applicable for content posted on a link aggregator followers should either subscripe to everything, turning the link aggregator into a money cow, or they will hit the wall so often that the aggregator becomes futile.

michaelmrose 7y ago

New York times, forbes, Washington post, wall street journal 600 a year. Median individual income in the United States is $865. If you are a highly paid engineer imagine writing a check for 3k for news. Poorer people could use the library if they had time between their 2 jobs.

GoodJokes 7y ago

Ok, but quality journalism is, uh, not the NYT or WaPo. They sold themselves out awhile ago. I guess you can claim some performative woke points for it though.

masonic 7y ago

Many of the major news sites in the USA are also available for free when on Starbucks Wi-Fi.

juststeve 7y ago

this is fine, but it's expensive to subscribe to all major news sites in the world.

113 7y ago

I would be fine with paying for good quality journalism, none of it is though.