3 ms·
The issue is you're looking at the value from journalism wrong. If you were to actually pay the cost of producing 1 article, it would be significantly more than
by tguedes 6y ago
The issue is you're looking at the value from journalism wrong. If you were to actually pay the cost of producing 1 article, it would be significantly more than you would be willing to pay to read it.
What you are paying for when you pay for journalism is not the value you perceive from reading the individual articles, but of supporting the entire organization's on-going production of journalism. You are a patron more than a customer.
Pick the one you want to subscribe to and stick with it. I would recommend subscribing to your local newspaper if you're only going to pick one.
- gwbas1c 6y agoThat worked when local newspapers were mostly distributing articles from the associated press, with some local news mixed in. To be quite frank, I'd rather just have an associated press subscription that includes access to all newspapers who are part of the associated press.
- GnarfGnarf 6y agoBut... thousands of people are paying to read that one article. The combined volume of all the people, who pay to read the same article, will pay for the cost of researching and writing the article.
- Noos 6y agoten thousand people pay ten cents to read an article. Yay, that's $1000! The aggregator takes his cut, so now it's $900. Taxes, $700. So about $18 per hour pay for a single reporter assuming it only takes 40 hours to write the article. And to be blunt, no one is going to pay more than ten cents. The spotify model does not work to support creation of new works; it only causes monetization of an older back catalog or "gift" works where people essentially give it away while working their day job.