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

Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

niemanlab.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 365 posts

Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

#141

Post by simias »

pjc50 wrote: post #71
monksy wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just typed it directly from my phone. That must have been updated. Haven't read the article, because I've seen numerous others from the news source. The issue I have with an article with a title like this: Why is it a bad thing to support Milo? Why is it "men who need to be called to fight"? (I don't care about reasons why you don't like Milo. I'm suggesting they're a person with different opinions, respect that) T…

> platforms have been used to push political stances. It's called a newspaper. The British press have never had the American obsession with pretending to be impartial. This has its advantages and disadvantages, but one implication is that it's very clear which party and what politics is supported by which paper.

Is it really a thing with American newspapers though? Don't they often explicitly endorse political candidates?

French newspapers are more like what you describe, all the big ones pretend to be "neutral", whatever that means. Neutrality is a fool's errand IMO, people on your right are always going to say you're a leftist and vice-versa. I want my newspaper to be honest, that's the important part IMO.

Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

#142

Post by lkrubner »

It is important to remember that The Guardian is overtly and proudly a paper of the Left. I signed up and started paying in late November of 2016 only because Trump had won the Presidency. If Trump had not won the Presidency, I doubt I would have ever given my money to The Guardian.

It has been reported elsewhere that the ACLU and Planned Parenthood had very good years, in terms of fundraising. All of this is the anti-Trump effect. The success of The Guardian fits into that pattern.

Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

#143

Post by tome »

tclancy wrote: post #119
walshemj wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes some what ironic given there role in the paradise papers etc newspapers and the media are always do what I say not what I or my owner does

For most papers, I'd say it's safe to assume the editorial staff do not make financial decisions.

Are the editorial staff allowed to report on the financial decisions of their owners?

Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

#144

Post by digi_owl »

f055 wrote: post #10

This. Years ago it was obvious to most newspapers that paid subscribers are their lifeline. Advertisers come and go, daily sales come and go, but long-period subscribers keep you afloat. Somehow, when the respected newspapers moved to the web, they forgot that, and kept pumping ads like crazy. This, in essence, moved the sense of their product from quality content to clickable content - these two don't mix. Consequen…

Sadly at this point i wonder if "clickbait" is ingrained into the corriculum. I see even national broadcasters adopt such headlines, even though they do not rely on ads to fund their services.

Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

#145

Post by gumby »

f055 wrote: post #10

This. Years ago it was obvious to most newspapers that paid subscribers are their lifeline. Advertisers come and go, daily sales come and go, but long-period subscribers keep you afloat. Somehow, when the respected newspapers moved to the web, they forgot that, and kept pumping ads like crazy. This, in essence, moved the sense of their product from quality content to clickable content - these two don't mix. Consequen…

> Years ago it was obvious to most newspapers that paid subscribers are their lifeline. Advertisers come and go, daily sales come and go, but long-period subscribers keep you afloat.

[Citation required]. In the era of paper newspapers advertisers were the bulk of revenue. Hi subs were needed to show advertisers that the publication was worth advertising in. It's not like the idea of CPI is a new one!

Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

#146

Post by KozmoNau7 »

croon wrote: post #57
KozmoNau7 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, neo-nazis are humans, and we should never forget that fact. They're not mindless monsters, they're actual living breathing people, and only by understanding that fact can we surmise their motivations and act against them.

> Well, neo-nazis are humans, and we should never forget that fact. They're not mindless monsters I'm not sure that being mindful monsters is better.

Oh no, absolutely not.

Realizing that they're just people like you or me or anyone else is terrifying, because it means we all potentially have these impulses.

It makes it much harder to think of them as an "other", and just brush them away with "well, they're just evil monsters".

Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

#147

Post by calcifer »

monksy wrote: post #124
calcifer wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Haven't read the article Wow, so you are complaining about, and asking questions to the author of, an article based purely on your perception of its title? > I don't care about reasons why you don't like Milo. I'm suggesting they're a person with different opinions, respect that Just a cursory search into who Milo is, what he says and does will show you he is a deeply, virulently intolerant person. And in order to…

As I stated before: I don't care about why you don't like Milo. What is important and what the news should be covering: Why are people taking a liking to him. (And do so in an impartial way without trying to fill the article with 80% hit-pieces) What is he saying and doing is catching a lot of attention? Why are his speeches resonating? How is he in existence? (Is his actions/his character in response to others) > th…

> Why are people taking a liking to him. (And do so in an impartial way without trying to fill the article with 80% hit-pieces) What is he saying and doing is catching a lot of attention? Why are his speeches resonating? How is he in existence? (Is his actions/his character in response to others)

You mean exactly what they did [1] on many [2], many occasions?

> I operate the "Church of Not Wearing Pants" [...] should that be published? It's as equally absurd as calling for a protest for someone you don't like.

If the paper you send it to considers this newsworthy or something the public should consider, of course. If not, you have many other avenues available to you, including self publishing.

> My problem is that unchecked journalism has given us an extreme selection of what is presented and the bias is injected into the news story from the author themselves.

I'm not sure I understand what "unchecked journalism" is, but I don't see a problem here.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/06/my-travels-i...

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/13/donald-trump...

Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

#148

Post by b0rsuk »

f055 wrote: post #10

This. Years ago it was obvious to most newspapers that paid subscribers are their lifeline. Advertisers come and go, daily sales come and go, but long-period subscribers keep you afloat. Somehow, when the respected newspapers moved to the web, they forgot that, and kept pumping ads like crazy. This, in essence, moved the sense of their product from quality content to clickable content - these two don't mix. Consequen…

As far as Polish media go, I really like:

oko.press - the best investigative journalism in Poland. They proclaim to focus 2/3 of their coverage on ruling party and 1/3 on the rest. Time will tell if they are honest with that. The strategy makes sense, because government has the most power.

wp.pl - while it has very clickbaity headlines, it's surprisingly balanced when it comes to point of view. Polish political scene and society is currently very polarized. I determined that wp is quite balanced by the fact that they cover both opposition and ruling party news. They carry articles critical of both ruling party and opposition. Make no mistake, WP is a tabloid, but it also has occasional very long articles and interviews, and those are quality journalism. On the other hand, they reprint kremlin propaganda from rt.com like Ukrainians who crucified children in Donbas without fact checking.

The bottom line is I use wp.pl for quick news (it acts as a front guard) and oko.press for fact checking.

As far as paper newspapers, Angora is my favourite. It shamelessly reprints articles from not just Poland but often from foreign papers, and it's interesting to read about Poland from a foreign point of view.

Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

#149

Post by bogomipz »

Pxtl wrote: post #50
aleph_naught wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really like the wikipedia model, but I know it wouldnt work for every outlet. I’ve contributed more to public radio and wikipedia than any other news service subscription. Ideally, nytimes/wapo/economist would be completely open, and one would be able to ‘donate’ with a single press of the apple pay button. I prefer that over yet another username password combo + subscription + app echo system I need to maintain. O…

The big worry is that this doesn't work for local news at all. The nitty gritty details of governance happen at the local level - municipal and state/provincial legislatures. Journalism on that stuff doesn't scale.

Why are they mutually exclusive? Newspapers have always had a local section.

Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads

#150

Post by [deleted] »

stfu wrote: post #135
nasredin wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who in time of moral crisis preserve their neutrality."?

A 'moral crisis' for the Guardian's editorial board is not a moral crisis for a 20-something popstar.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN