11–20 of 345 posts
So does this mean Google is going to stop indexing the text of WSJ articles?
I think this is great news. I'd love to see WSJ ad free and funded with subscriptions. I'm not sure I would subscribe, but I want to live in a world where it's possible.
I want a good source of news, ad-free, and I'm willing to pay for it. Unfortunately it seems like I'm in the extreme minority.
So does this mean Google is going to stop indexing the text of WSJ articles?
There is still incentive for WSJ to allow Google to index, they probably just will redirect you to sign up when you click through. Perhaps they'd let Google just index the preview text to prevent using the cache
I think this is great news. I'd love to see WSJ ad free and funded with subscriptions. I'm not sure I would subscribe, but I want to live in a world where it's possible.
I would love to see the NYT completely ad-free. I subscribed for a few months thinking my subscription fee would remove the ads, but that wasn't the case. I want a good source of news, ad-free, and I'm willing to pay for it. Unfortunately it seems like I'm in the extreme minority.
Hopefully subscriptions will encourage better quality ads, headlines, and stories. Subscriptions do allow for less click bait.
I think this is great news. I'd love to see WSJ ad free and funded with subscriptions. I'm not sure I would subscribe, but I want to live in a world where it's possible.
I would love to see the NYT completely ad-free. I subscribed for a few months thinking my subscription fee would remove the ads, but that wasn't the case. I want a good source of news, ad-free, and I'm willing to pay for it. Unfortunately it seems like I'm in the extreme minority.
Hmmmm. In the FAQ, under the question "Are paywalls ok?", there's this: >It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds. If this loophole is closed, will there be any workarounds? If that's the case, then I wonder if it'll still be OK to post WSJ links to HN.
I think this is great news. I'd love to see WSJ ad free and funded with subscriptions. I'm not sure I would subscribe, but I want to live in a world where it's possible.
I would love to see the NYT completely ad-free. I subscribed for a few months thinking my subscription fee would remove the ads, but that wasn't the case. I want a good source of news, ad-free, and I'm willing to pay for it. Unfortunately it seems like I'm in the extreme minority.
According to this, it will need to mark WSJ links differently in Google News.
Interestingly, I tested it and links from Google news still had a "First Click Free", contrary to OP. To test:
1. Go to https://news.google.com/ from a computer that hasn't visited any WSJ articles that day
2. Click on a WSJ link (mine was https://www.wsj.com/articles/daniel-tarullo-federal-reserve-...)
3. See if the whole article is displayed. For me, it was, but when I tried again it only showed a snippet. So it seems like they're only showing the very first click, which does not comply with Google's guidelines above (which require 3 articles a day to be viewable). Anyone else want to offer data points?
Edit: oh, OP says it's only starting Monday.
(Of course, WSJ may be exempt because of direct communication with Google, which I'd expect anyway at their size and at the fact that they weren't banned when they started testing this. But Google should really note any exceptions in their policy.)
First of all, I think it's great that journalists can get compensated for their work. but, strictly speaking as a consumer, I must say their paywall is completely out of touch with the way I want to pay for news consumption. I don't mind paying 5c or even 10c per article, but I'm certainly not going to sign up to pay 120$ for 6 months, if I'm only going to read 1 or 2 articles here and there. but since they've done i…
https://blendle.com/ seems to meet your needs.
It's a concern that the newspapers which have actual reporters in the field are disappearing behind paywalls.