3 ms·
I thinks 'iTunes for news' is an excellent idea. I would pay for stories. I will not pay for AP stories or similar ones. Usually the headline contains as much
by micks56 18y ago
I thinks 'iTunes for news' is an excellent idea. I would pay for stories.
I will not pay for AP stories or similar ones. Usually the headline contains as much content as the story.
What I will pay for are those incredibly written expose stories that appear in magazines from time to time. I do not care enough about music to purchase a subscription to Rolling Stone. I do want to read their longer essays though, for example the one on McCain a couple months ago.
I never would have thought to read Gourmet. But I loved David Foster Wallace's Consider the Lobster. I would have paid for that article alone. The rest of the magazine doesn't interest me much.
I would also pay for newspaper stories that are more than just daily reporting. I want the investigative stuff. Stories with insight.
I would consider a monthly subscription to the WSJ so I could get their daily news.
I would pay for the WSJ and NYT op-ed pages so I could read the letters written by CEO's. big time politicians, etc.
- hussong 18y agoI share your preference but I think as long as a significant number of people still buy the entire magazine or even a subscription to get the 'great stories', unbundling will only hurt publishers' profits.
- micks56 18y agoMaybe. But maybe the people that want the magazine will keep the subscription and the publishers will gain me as a customer. I read BusinessWeek every week. I pay for that subscription. They would not lose me as a customer if they went on iNews.