I think the major publishers are missing out on an opportunity to define the next-gen of aggregators. What I mean is, part of the appeal of the aggregators isn

I think the major publishers are missing out on an opportunity to define the next-gen of aggregators. What I mean is, part of the appeal of the aggregators isn't only that I have stories from a bunch of different places. An important part (to me) is the consistency of the layout. It isn't that the articles are of higher quality (80% of what shows up on HN is dreck, too), it's that I can mentally sort through them. Once a link is selected and clicked, though, my entire experience changes. Inconsistent layouts, ad placement, all sorts of "tricks". Once away from the aggregator, the experience begins to suck. To me, there seems to be an opportunity there for online newspaper sites to take their existing model (original reporting), and combine it with aggregation. Rather than link to another site, package the content with a consistent interface. The tricky part is making sure that everybody is compensated fairly. If paying HN (or Reddit, or even Fark) to aggregate the content as well as the links resulted in an easier experience for me, I'd do it. How much, I'm not sure, but certainly more than "free".