5 ms·

They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news in Economist / FT / WSJ / WashingtonPost etc... Well except paying $300 a month I guess.

no-name-here 2mo ago
> They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news in Economist / FT / WSJ / WashingtonPost etc... > Well except paying $300 a month It looks like the WSJ is available for $2/mo or the WaPo for $2.50 mo. You probably don’t need all of them simultaneously as they frequently cover the same topics, including pretty much all of the big news stories - subscribe to one for a year then switch to another. And even if you aren’t subscribed to all of them you are still contributing in a small way to keeping good journalism alive.
- apexalpha 2mo ago
  I am already subscribed to 2 papers in my own country at ~$50 total since one comes in print once a week. Just a matter of priorities.
  - no-name-here 2mo ago
    My reply was to help the grandparent commenter who said "They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news". If you already have multiple paid news subscriptions that are working great for you, you can ignore my suggestions. Edit: Ah, you were the grandparent commenter who said "They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news."
javier2 2mo ago
its under 15$ a month...
- mitxela 2mo ago
  Each. For over 20 of them.
  - no-name-here 2mo ago
    Is that sarcasm, or do you really need 20 of them? I'm an avid news reader, and there is no way I could get through even a fraction of that number of news sources daily. And isn't most major news covered by every one of the biggest news sources - one great source can accommodate the vast majority of news topics for someone, especially if they are on a tight budget.
    - mitxela 2mo ago
      How do you know which ones Hacker News is going to link to?
cluckindan 2mo ago
Except you cannot know if the system has tampered with the content you think is genuinely from those sites.
- embedding-shape 2mo ago
  Fucking sucks, what's the alternative for people without money or people who the papers/businesses don't allow them to do subscribe because of the country they're from/in?
  - no-name-here 2mo ago
    Use sources such as PBS, NPR, etc. - they are available globally, and there are non-US-based sources if readers prefer.
    - embedding-shape 2mo ago
      Tried searching for the submission article or even a mention of this event on their websites but I found nothing. Are you sure these are actually faithful replacements of everything that archive.is/.today unlocks for people? It's a lot of paywalls they remove, lots of stuff isn't reported elsewhere.
    - mitxela 2mo ago
      Sources that.... don't post the things people are trying to read? Besides, if it's free, you're the product.

no-name-here 2mo ago

> They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news in Economist / FT / WSJ / WashingtonPost etc... > Well except paying $300 a month It looks like the WSJ is available for $2/mo or the WaPo for $2.50 mo. You probably don’t need all of them simultaneously as they frequently cover the same topics, including pretty much all of the big news stories - subscribe to one for a year then switch to another. And even if you aren’t subscribed to all of them you are still contributing in a small way to keeping good journalism alive.

apexalpha 2mo ago
I am already subscribed to 2 papers in my own country at ~$50 total since one comes in print once a week. Just a matter of priorities.
- no-name-here 2mo ago
  My reply was to help the grandparent commenter who said "They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news". If you already have multiple paid news subscriptions that are working great for you, you can ignore my suggestions. Edit: Ah, you were the grandparent commenter who said "They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news."

javier2 2mo ago

its under 15$ a month...

mitxela 2mo ago
Each. For over 20 of them.
- no-name-here 2mo ago
  Is that sarcasm, or do you really need 20 of them? I'm an avid news reader, and there is no way I could get through even a fraction of that number of news sources daily. And isn't most major news covered by every one of the biggest news sources - one great source can accommodate the vast majority of news topics for someone, especially if they are on a tight budget.
  - mitxela 2mo ago
    How do you know which ones Hacker News is going to link to?

cluckindan 2mo ago

Except you cannot know if the system has tampered with the content you think is genuinely from those sites.

embedding-shape 2mo ago
Fucking sucks, what's the alternative for people without money or people who the papers/businesses don't allow them to do subscribe because of the country they're from/in?
- no-name-here 2mo ago
  Use sources such as PBS, NPR, etc. - they are available globally, and there are non-US-based sources if readers prefer.
  - embedding-shape 2mo ago
    Tried searching for the submission article or even a mention of this event on their websites but I found nothing. Are you sure these are actually faithful replacements of everything that archive.is/.today unlocks for people? It's a lot of paywalls they remove, lots of stuff isn't reported elsewhere.
  - mitxela 2mo ago
    Sources that.... don't post the things people are trying to read? Besides, if it's free, you're the product.