2 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 It looks like th
by no-name-here 6d 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 6d agoI 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 6d agoMy 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."