Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

digiday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 345 posts

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#81

Post by fovc »

pascalxus wrote: post #4

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…

I posted this somewhere else on this thread, but I've seen a lot of the "I just want to pay 25c per article" comments. Try https://blendle.com

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#83

Post by raldi »

idclip wrote: post #76
raldi wrote: post #56

Has any publisher tried out a paywall along the lines of the following? "Hey, you've spent 29 hours so far this year reading 119 articles. Suggested donation: $62"

Do you realise the kind of tracking that entails?

Most paywall newspapers already keep track of how many articles you've read this month, and count it down for you; this would just add a timer, too. Which their analytics code is surely already reporting.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#84

Post by lunchladydoris »

Out of curiosity I searched for the Wall Street Journal subscription page. I selected my country (UK) and then clicked on the subscription offer. I was then taken to a Hong Kong page with no obvious way of changing it back to the UK.

If they want subscribers, they're going to have to do a better job than that.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#85

Post by SturgeonsLaw »

oconnore wrote: post #61
ikeboy wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would give you HN gold if it existed (now we just need a bookmarklet/extension to automate this). Do we know that this will still work on Monday? Maybe this will also be closed and you'll need a special link?

Instead of buying internet points for someone who figured out a little hack to access journalism, maybe you could instead pay for journalism?

I wouldn't want a single cent of my money going to that bottom feeder Rupert Murdoch

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#86

Post by jay_kyburz »

harryjo wrote: post #35
jay_kyburz wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would consider perhaps $5-$10 a month if the WSJ was going to be my only source of news. If I could trust it to provide me with all I need every morning while I eat my breakfast. Unfortunately I live in Australia so most stuff in WSJ I don't care about. (And we have the ABC)

Why is a full feed of quality news worth less to you than Netflix?

Netflix is $9 a month here in Australia.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#87

Post by jay_kyburz »

executive wrote: post #48
jay_kyburz wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would consider perhaps $5-$10 a month if the WSJ was going to be my only source of news. If I could trust it to provide me with all I need every morning while I eat my breakfast. Unfortunately I live in Australia so most stuff in WSJ I don't care about. (And we have the ABC)

Not sure if this is a good deal, but take a look: https://myaccount.news.com.au/theaustralian/subscribe?pkgDef...

$16 a month for The Australian and the WSJ for 3 months, then $32 a month. That is a bit steep given we all already pay for http://www.abc.net.au/news/

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#88

Post by Gargoyle »

SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #85
oconnore wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of buying internet points for someone who figured out a little hack to access journalism, maybe you could instead pay for journalism?

I wouldn't want a single cent of my money going to that bottom feeder Rupert Murdoch

Then don't read articles on a site he owns.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#90

Post by seanp2k2 »

teej wrote: post #42
anigbrowl wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the problem. I might be willing pay a lot for news. What I don't want is 100 different newspaper subscriptions. And to say that you should just pick a favorite newspaper and get everything from there is like demanding you decide what books you want before visiting a library.

That's exactly the problem with the person I replied to. Maybe there's a micropayment solution that someone will crack the nut on after decades of people talking about it. But that solution is definitely not 5¢ an article for WSJ quality news.

My personal opinion is that news orgs should operate as non-profits, since profit motive drives them to editorialize and publish things to get money vs publishing things to inform people about what's going on. I want reporting, I want facts, I don't want entertainment.
Post reply on HN