4 ms·
And then a few years later when the site shuts down because nobody was willing to pay for the content that it would still be around if you and others had just p
by gamblor956 9d ago
And then a few years later when the site shuts down because nobody was willing to pay for the content that it would still be around if you and others had just ponied up the cost of one morning latte each month.
- m132 9d agoWell, sorry! Make the payment process and the website at least half as frictionless and private, and I'll be happy to pay!
- pavel_lishin 9d agoI mean, I don't even have the option to pay - I can't access the site at all. And there is nothing anyone can say to talk me out of adblockers - ad networks are a delivery system for malware and fraud.
- alyeska2 8d agoThe linked site shows me two subscription options, $289/year or $29 every 4 weeks. Expensive latte. The economics of online new seem challenging. Bloomberg is $399/year. Wall Street Journal is $715/year. NY Times is $390/year. Washington Post $140/year. That's a couple thousand dollars a year, just to have a handful of mainstream news sites. Add in local or regional sites, or content focused on hobbies, niche interests, etc and a person is looking at a huge chunk of their income (keep in mind median individual income in USA is $40k) going to reading the news.
- sphinxterai 8d agoThe economist can shut down and it will be a vast improvement to the world. Far left rag.
- zzleeper 8d agoFar left? Most economists consider it center-right, and it has been like that for more than 100 years.