This reduces the number of reliable and reasonably neutral news sources accessible to the majority of people, which is a bad thing.
I would not call Reuters neutral. [1]
Reuters website goes behind paywall in new strategy
11–20 of 127 posts
Re: Reuters website goes behind paywall in new strategy
#12[deleted]
Re: Reuters website goes behind paywall in new strategy
#13"Reuters.com will remain free for a preview period, but will require users to register after five stories. It is not immediately clear when it will begin charging." Reuters reporting about Reuters in the third person is amusing. "We asked ourselves when we would begin charging but we didn't know."
A tangent, but I love that the wikipedia article on Humans is in 3rd Person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human Reads like some alien civilization documenting us.
A fun one: "They're made out of meat" [1]
[1] https://www.mit.edu/people/dpolicar/writing/prose/text/think...
Re: Reuters website goes behind paywall in new strategy
#14This reduces the number of reliable and reasonably neutral news sources accessible to the majority of people, which is a bad thing.
I would not call Reuters neutral. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters
Gee, I'd always considered Reuters and AP to be as close to neutral press as there is. Who is neutral if not Reuters?
Re: Reuters website goes behind paywall in new strategy
#15Terrible shame. I read news off it (with nojs). Seems I'll be on the hunt for a replacement when this comes.
Re: Reuters website goes behind paywall in new strategy
#16"Reuters.com will remain free for a preview period, but will require users to register after five stories. It is not immediately clear when it will begin charging." Reuters reporting about Reuters in the third person is amusing. "We asked ourselves when we would begin charging but we didn't know."
The answer to 'when' is likely going to be: after we collect data about user views, sign in rates, return rates, etc.
Someone highup wants a money grab but they also want to know roughly how much money there is to grab and how much will be lost to see if the strategy is worth pursuing first. I cherish these innovative businesses and all their high-risk taking that leads them there.
Re: Reuters website goes behind paywall in new strategy
#17I used to read Reuters religiously, but have drifted away from them as I've felt their neutrality falter a bit.
They're still one of the better organization, and I'm sad to see them go behind a pay wall as it leaves fewer outrage driven outlets available. At the same time, I understand it is difficult to fund journalism in the current atmosphere.
Re: Reuters website goes behind paywall in new strategy
#18"Its a bold strategy Cotton, let's see if it pays off for em."
For some reason I figured Reuters and AP would be the last to go behind a paywall for the retail consumer. I remember those always being the safe neutral sources I could use in debate or extemporaneous speeches back on the debate/speech team in high school. Sucks it'll be harder to get access to now.
Re: Reuters website goes behind paywall in new strategy
#19I wonder at what point Google needs to pay attention to this. If a large number of websites are behind registration or paywalls, then the chance that any individual person searching would have a subscription (or registration) to any individual news site is pretty low. People might have some small number of subscriptions, but not for many sites.
So, why keep returning search results that the end user can't use without registration or purchase? It's essentially "page cloaking" when the rendered page doesn't match google sees.
To me, if you want a paywall, that should come with the consequence that your site isn't included in search results for the general public.
Edit: It's also getting irritating here on HN. I might have a subscription or login to one or two sites, but HN regularly shares stuff from Medium, WSJ, NYT, Wired, and so on. I have to imagine that most people following these posted stories hit the reg/pay-wall.
Re: Reuters website goes behind paywall in new strategy
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would not call Reuters neutral. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters
Gee, I'd always considered Reuters and AP to be as close to neutral press as there is. Who is neutral if not Reuters?
I think they are about as neutral as you will find. The wider environment has just become hyper partisan. It has certainly influenced both organizations (which I read daily), and I would agree they're not as neutral as they were once lauded to be, but I don't know that you'll find a better option.
Checking out allsides.com, and their bias ratings, is a good way to see just how bad the other options are.