4 ms·
Well, other than it being from the Daily Wire, it's at least readable. Why post something that can't be read without a subscription? With the Daily Wire I can
by Intermernet 2y ago
Well, other than it being from the Daily Wire, it's at least readable. Why post something that can't be read without a subscription?
With the Daily Wire I can at least read something and filter for the known conservative bias, and use ad-block to remove the copious inline ads. With Bloomberg, I get one paragraph. It's a practically useless link to share, unless you're promoting Bloomberg subscriptions.
- donohoe 2y agoMaybe over time a small set of people would subscribe if they saw good stories coming from a particular news source. Maybe not.
- Intermernet 2y agoHow would I know it was a good story if I have to pay to read it?
- darkclouds 2y ago[dead]
- Brian_K_White 2y agoWhat do I care about Bloomberg or any other publisher getting a few subscriptions over time? Is that the reason HN exists and the reason I came here? I don't wish them ill, but did I come to HN because I have a goal to grow some web sites subscriber base? Their business model is their problem. Their plight, however valid, does not change the fact that it's inconsiderate to post a link that everyone can not read. Even a monetarily free site that requires nothing but a registration is thoughtless unless that is the true source of the topic. I don't even like twitter links but sometimes that IS the story is that someone tweeted something, or published something there, so it's reasonable or unavoidable in those cases.