12 ms·

I don't necessarily love paywalls but it seems a bit uncalled for to automate an already well known workaround. Should we be actively subverting business models

• JoshTheGeek 12y ago
  What is the workaround?
  • xaneem 12y ago
    Google the article title and use the link. Technically, using Google as referer in request headers.
  • enjo 12y ago
    Google the headline.
• blisterpeanuts 12y ago
  It does feel excessive or cynical or something to install an actual app to work around a paywall. The WSJ organization says, you must pay us $28.99 a month for full access to this content. That's the value they've placed on their content, that's the price they are charging, and that's what people should pay. The fact that they also make most if not all of the content available on a "complimentary" basis via Google suggests that they do value occasional visits from non-subscribers. However if millions of non-subscribers were to install a paywall avoidance app and access the full content on a daily basis, this would probably violate the spirit of "occasional". I used to subscribe to the WSJ year after year, since about 1999 when they charged $79/year. When it climbed over $120/year, I gritted my teeth and resubscribed, because I still valued the content. But $28.99/month is ridiculous, and I suspect they only get that from larger corporate accounts that have negotiated volume discounts and such. Everyone else either googles the articles or has given up. To my mind, it's better to have high readership numbers, e.g. Facebook with 1.5 billion free subscribers, versus high subscription rates and a limited readership, but I have no idea how their business model works.