311–320 of 345 posts
With every single news outlet taking polical position lately - it became intolerable to read or find somewhat objective news source. I don't mind paying <$10 / mo for clean no BS objective and detailed coverage.
That makes sense. But your pricing is unreasonable. I don't mind paying $10k for a Ferrari.
news articles have a single upfront cost, but subsequent copies carry near-zero production cost.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe this doesn't count as supporting, but: you also get free access with a .edu, .gov, or .mil email address.
really? I cant find that option. How does one sign up?
http://help.washingtonpost.com/link/portal/15067/15080/Artic...
Tangent: I'm not sure I can think of recent money I've spent better than a year-long Washington Post subscription. Not because I want to support journalism (though I do), but because having a whole newspaper to flip through every day is so much more productive and efficient than getting dribs and drabs through Twitter and free news sites --- many of which are ultimately sourcing through the journalism that organizati…
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Wall St. Journal is the single highest quality news source I'm aware of.
I'd have a tough time deciding between the NYT and WSJ next, especially since the editorial/opinion section of the WaPo is the least valuable to me (informed opinion is something you can get everywhere on the Internet for free). (WaPo vs. NYT was basically a coinflip decision for me, but doing WaPo and then NYT would probably create a pretty significant overlap, and WSJ wouldn't. On the other hand, the NYT is a subst…
One axis of quality measures here, using the Foreign Policy Top 100 Global Thinkers list:
https://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/3hp41w/trackin...
I see in the comments there are still some workarounds to this paywall. Good to know. Cheers. Just a reminder another workaround to the paywall is to you know actually subscribe to the newspaper. That is an option they offer. Obviously not possible for everyone. But if you have the money and want to read and support journalism... WSJ is really far from perfect but it's not the worst newspaper one could be subscribed…
I don't think it's smart to pay to read stuff from a group that also gets money from advertisers. You're either the product or the customer, when in doubt you'll be the product. Real subscription journalism doesn't do advertising.
https://archive.org/stream/commercialismjou00holtuoft#page/1...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you say that? Their political coverage and some of their deep-dive investigative pieces have been top drawer IMO.
How about these two pieces published within about a week of each other? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/01/... https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/01/23/... You'll note that the two stories are directly contradictory. The claim made by the WaPo is stronger than Senator Sanders' and yet Senator Sanders received 4 Pinocchios for the claim. I also like FAIR's analysis of the Wa…
Another way to get around many paywalls is to change your browser's user agent string to 'Googlebot'. I've got a subscription to the Financial Times, but if there's a one-off article somewhere else that I want to read, that's my go-to method for getting through a paywall. I wonder if their fix will close it off too.
Google recommends using reverse DNS lookup to determine if a client claiming to be Googlebot is really from Google – https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/80553?hl=en It isn't hard for paywall website operators to use this to block Googlebot fakers. (Rather than doing a reverse DNS lookup on every request, you'd want to maintain a local cache of those results, so you only need to do DNS lookups on new client I…
Cheaper to look for Google ASNs.
So does this mean Google is going to stop indexing the text of WSJ articles?
Google should absolutely not index, at least not under the current organic and news search. Why should they send traffic to articles that people can't freely view? I would support some kind of premium news offering from Google where they do index these and you are allowed access through a revenue share subscription made via Google.