I wish I could support individual journalists somehow. As things are today I’d be supporting the status quo where the owner has complete editorial control, and the audience has none. I’m 100% not interested in that. I also don’t really want to support the massive administrative apparatus and various other freeloaders which tend to dominate organizations once they grow past a certain size. Under the current set up a hard hitting journalist won’t get an extra dime.
Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads
151–160 of 365 posts
Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads
#152I have a twisted idea to appeal to people's sense of charity:
Each person that subscribes, sponsors "no ads" visit for a random stranger. The cookie could last for a day.
Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
For most papers, I'd say it's safe to assume the editorial staff do not make financial decisions.
What they (the finance department) do (minimization of their tax bill) is legal and sensible and necessary for the paper's survival. If it were not and this was known to the staff, it would be no excuse morally or legally to say that the staff 'don't make these decisions'.
[deleted]
Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some men feel weirdly threatened by the possibility of a world where their less than stellar behaviour towards women might be called out. Every comment like the one you're replying to is the same "I loved X until they lost all credibility and became biased by Y" where Y = calling out shitty MRA/Alt-right activist figures.
Nice try at attempting to slander my character or political stances: but no dice for you. This isn't about my own personal stances. It's about the publication and if you can call it news. I'm really not sure where the MRA or comments on women came from in my original comment. The Guardian (And the BBC) used to my main source for international news, and cultural trends until about 2012ish. That's when they started hea…
I don't get what you're saying at all . Publishing opinion pieces that advance a socio-economic agenda is one of the things I expect of a news paper.
If you don't agree with it you can disagree with it in the comments, write a letter to the editor, or stop reading.
But I like opinion pieces.
Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads
#155Earlier 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.
But it doesn't need to scale. It needs to be as big as the area it services.
Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads
#156`
Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
Important to note that the Guardian is not actually financially successful at all. They have been suffering heavy losses for years http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/01/heavy-losses-...
They also make use of offshore tax structures to minimise their taxes, such as the £302m profit from selling Auto Trader magazine. https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/04/will-the-guardian-now-...
Just checking the references in this article. The offshore tax claim seems to be referenced to "Guido Fawkes" (https://order-order.com/ "Guido Fawkes Blog of plots, rumours and conspiracy") which seems to be a collection of conspiracy articles about all kinds of stuffs, written by this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Staines
Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads
#158I have a twisted idea to appeal to people's sense of charity: Each person that subscribes, sponsors "no ads" visit for a random stranger. The cookie could last for a day.
That's just subscriber sharing links. Lots of papers do this. There's a bit of a 'free-trial' mixed in there but the important bit is giving subscribers the ability to share links guilt-free.
Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads
#159The way I see it this model can only work for mediums with international readership. Say for example you have a newspaper in a small country with 10M people. Let's assume 5% of general population reads a newspaper and you have 5 major ones. That's roughly 100k readers per newspaper. Now how many of those could you convince to subscribe? Even if we assume an optimistic 10% that could hardly keep a newspaper afloat. Yo…
> You need readership in the millions to make this model viable Not necessarily; for primarily online publications, operating costs rise roughly linearly with readership. I operate a donor-supported publication with a much smaller readership than the Guardian, yet we have stayed afloat for years via donations because our costs are much lower. It's a model that can work for practically any size of publication.
Your publication cost are roughly linear; your content creation costs are more or less constant with an increase in number of readers. I would assume that your content creation costs are vastly lower than the Guardian's which is why you can get away with fewer readers. You wouldn't be able to produce content like the Guardian on your budget, though.
Re: Asking members to support journalism, The Guardian raises more revenue than ads
#160LOL @ the type of journalism The Guardian promotes... I'd rather burn money than support a publication that published articles to support my country's corrupt politicians. God forbid law enforcement investigate them. The Guardian always has their back.