121–130 of 173 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> A 6th grader should NOT, under any circumstances, be taught how to give a blow job by a 400lb man in a dress. Can you show one instance of this actually happening? I'm not aware of any and what does get banned seems to be a pretty far cry from that sort of thing. Honestly, this registers as more of a pretext than a legitimate concern.
Some years ago they had a large audience, me included, who got great value out of their investigative journalism. At some point they started pivoting into some weird form of advocacy journalism and clickbait garbage, alienating their existing audience, and apparently failing to find a new one. Good riddance.
The core problem is that people don't want to pay for news. You can see this right here on HN. Just submit a paywalled article and the top comment will be a link to the archive.org version.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s how we used to pay for newspapers though. Cable companies use bundling instead and you get a lot of crap that you don’t need but they price discriminate you into.
Sure, but how many people subscribed to >2 papers? Growing up, the family had the Washington Post and Economist, plus the nightly news on one of the major broadcast stations. Some people might also get the WSJ. I can't think of anybody I knew who got more than that.
The group who does pay for news, as I've alluded to, are people in the financial sector, or those who's knowledge of the news affects or is inherent to their job.
Business people, basically.
On a personal note, in high-school I competed on a team competition – Academic Decathlon – and my testing subject was Current Events. So I may be somewhat outside the norm.
I subscribe to the Financial Times, the Economist, WSJ, Bloomberg, and more.
Some of their reports were remarkable, for example "The Cannibal Warlords of Liberia" [1] - that takes courage. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRuSS0iiFyo
There's an interesting confrontation over that piece in the NY Times 'Page Six' documentary, which filmed David Carr, the Times's then media correspondent, interviewing the Vice Founders: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLmkec_4Rfo I think part of the Vice pitch was always that it was a disruptor of the old-fashioned media narratives, uncovering the stories to which boring old media was blind. I tend to agree with Ca…
That was a pitch that they stole from Unreported World [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0477545/], and like the new Krishnan Guru-Murthy-produced version of Unreported World, Vice strictly stuck to areas of current US interest and tightly followed CIA and administration talking points.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The core problem is that people don't want to pay for news. You can see this right here on HN. Just submit a paywalled article and the top comment will be a link to the archive.org version.
I want to pay for news, but: 1. I don't want to pay for what is currently called "news". That is, agenda-based editorials and selective fact-choosing. 2. I want to be able to subscribe and unsubscribe easily, from my phone, without dark patterns, or having to talk to a human. The closest thing I have right now is paying for https://sumi.news and glancing at headlines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mentioning my mother in this context is as counter-productive as possible. In fact, if it were not for my mother, I would give women a bit more slack.
Whatever your mother did or didn't do to you, she gave birth to you. That is already something big. Would you rather her have not done this for you? Destroying is easy, creating is hard. (and raising a child in this world is as well) "if it were not for my mother, I would give women a bit more slack." And whatever happened, you are saying clearly, that because of one women, you see all women less. Maybe that's not fa…
Besides, since you seem to love to trigger me with just the "right" sentences:
Would you rather her have not done this for you?
Some years ago they had a large audience, me included, who got great value out of their investigative journalism. At some point they started pivoting into some weird form of advocacy journalism and clickbait garbage, alienating their existing audience, and apparently failing to find a new one. Good riddance.
The core problem is that people don't want to pay for news. You can see this right here on HN. Just submit a paywalled article and the top comment will be a link to the archive.org version.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s how we used to pay for newspapers though. Cable companies use bundling instead and you get a lot of crap that you don’t need but they price discriminate you into.
Sure, but how many people subscribed to >2 papers? Growing up, the family had the Washington Post and Economist, plus the nightly news on one of the major broadcast stations. Some people might also get the WSJ. I can't think of anybody I knew who got more than that.
My parents may have been more well off so this might not be representative, but it wasn't just papers; we also subscribed to several magazines. Growing up I remember we had:
* New York Times
* Wall Street Journal
* The Economist Magazine
* Time Magazine
* Nintendo Power
* Highlights for Children
I remember my Aunt subscribing to Vogue, Ebony and Reader's Digest, on top of the finance publications she and my dad were subscribed to. 30 years ago, Vice might have existed as a magazine, not a major publication.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I want to pay for news. I just don't want to pay for every news platform there is on this world, searately, because some manager somewhere decides that this will push the brand (same applies for movies, songs, etc) (not to go against your argument, I'm just elaborating on it)
Agreed. My solution was to subscribe to one reasonable newspaper (Washington Post). Between that, free BBC content, and NPR, I think I get a reasonable overview of world and local news. But, that does mean I miss breaking investigative news from other sources. At least until it's picked up elsewhere or made available elsewhere. It's a bummer at time, but paying for a large subset of possible news sources would cost 1…