3 ms·
To me this just proves the point. Am I really going to subscribe to the top 5 news papers? Where do you draw the line? I'm probably not going to subscribe to m
by anm89 6y ago
To me this just proves the point. Am I really going to subscribe to the top 5 news papers? Where do you draw the line?
I'm probably not going to subscribe to more than one general paper, because they probably have 90% overlap in coverage meaning even the second subscription is drastically less valuable than the first. There is no way I'm making it to 5.
Realistically I can get 85% percent of that news without subscribing to any meaning even one subscription is a stretch and there is no way I'm doing more than that. In the event that there is one article every three months that is LAT specific that I just cannot go without reading, I'll find some way to breach the paywall in that instance.
For the record, I'm not claiming NYT or WAPO are better papers than the times. In fact I hate the NYT and have more or less no opinion of the LAT.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago> Am I really going to subscribe to the top 5 news papers? Where do you draw the line? Whichever one catches your fancy? We don’t all need to subscribe to every newspaper. Does everyone buy each brand of shaving cream?
- anm89 6y agoAgreed but how often does the LAT win this battle. I'm assuming this is a winner(s) take all scenario and they are mostly a loser.
- avz 6y agoThis is an entirely sensible position, as long as we don't simultaneously decry winner-takes-all market dynamics. On second thought, we can in fact do both simultaneously by shifting the responsibility for supporting good journalism onto our favorite other, such as "the government", "the rich", "regulators", "we as a society", etc. I am personally completely satisfied paying for publications as long as I read at least one article per issue. In fact, due to time constraints, one article per issue has become something of an objective.