Live data from Hacker News

Making the news available at no cost is a victory

sltrib.com

51–60 of 141 posts

Re: Making the news available at no cost is a victory

#51

The "Free News" model is certainly something I've struggled to solve. How exactly can you provide impartial, objective reporting when you cant afford the salaries? If the people arent interested in paying... what else can you do?

> If the people arent interested in paying

They are, according to the OP:

https://www.sltrib.com/news/business/2026/03/31/tribune-payw...

Re: Making the news available at no cost is a victory

#52

The "Free News" model is certainly something I've struggled to solve. How exactly can you provide impartial, objective reporting when you cant afford the salaries? If the people arent interested in paying... what else can you do?

Don't try to be "objective" or "impartial." That's an impossible task, and anyone claiming to do so is being dishonest.

Instead, own your biases. Make them explicit and public. That way people can understand were you're coming from, and take that into account.

There will always be bias in any reporting. It's better to make it visible than to pretend it doesn't exist.

This means having a clear perspective and "owning" that perspective, instead of shying away from it.

Coincidentally, this type of thinking can dramatically increase brand loyalty and trust.

Re: Making the news available at no cost is a victory

#53
I often wonder why the model of Dutch news site https://decorrespondent.nl/ isn't more widely followed. In a nutshell, it's:

   * Only paid subscribers can read
   * Subscribers can share an article (= copy a unique share link)
   * Shared articles are free for anyone
This makes it so that eg if some Correspondent article were submitted to HN, that'd be a share link by a subscriber, and everyone on HN can read it without a paywall. It'll say "this article was shared with you by $NAME" on top. At the same time if you then want to go to the Correspondent homepage and figure out what's been going on in NL slow news land, you can't, unless you subscribe.

They've been 100% subscriber-funded, zero ads (and I believe also zero government support but not sure), for over a decade now. It's clearly a model that works, at least their target audience (lefty, highly educated).

Re: Making the news available at no cost is a victory

#54

As a Canadian with "free news" it's not great. You get media outlets that almost never criticize the government for fear of getting defunded. We saw this with the lack of coverage on major bills just yesterday.

'Free' and 'government funded' are not the same thing. The OP doesn't seem to be government funded.

Also, the BBC has no problem criticizing the UK government.

Re: Making the news available at no cost is a victory

#55

The "Free News" model is certainly something I've struggled to solve. How exactly can you provide impartial, objective reporting when you cant afford the salaries? If the people arent interested in paying... what else can you do?

Don't try to be "objective" or "impartial." That's an impossible task, and anyone claiming to do so is being dishonest. Instead, own your biases. Make them explicit and public. That way people can understand were you're coming from, and take that into account. There will always be bias in any reporting. It's better to make it visible than to pretend it doesn't exist. This means having a clear perspective and "owning"…

Anyone claiming that they are trying to be impartial is being dishonest?

Re: Making the news available at no cost is a victory

#56
post #48

The "Free News" model is certainly something I've struggled to solve. How exactly can you provide impartial, objective reporting when you cant afford the salaries? If the people arent interested in paying... what else can you do?

I don't think the following is a great idea for many reasons, but it's an idea that has been on my mind for a while and I'd like to share it to hear some thoughts: Germany has (used to have? I don't follow this closely) the "church tax": citizens are obligated to pay the tax no matter how much faith they have, but are free to channel it to a denomination/organization they believe in. Maybe a liberal, democratic state…

The issue is that this is on a balance sheet of a budget somewhere and an autocrat will selectively choose to cut with a knife such they speak ill of them. See the current debate with the FCC in the USA.

I am sure there is some kind of financial instrument that could be structured in a way to pay down a news org with public money that cannot just be slashed at whim and will.

Re: Making the news available at no cost is a victory

#57
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe that is part of the plan, eliminate truth so that everyone just gives up. Perhaps crowd sourced facts/news with legit upvoting, weighted upvoting based on historic 'credibility'. Top contributions get a share of add revenue.

Doesn't crowd sourcing and upvotes and revenue for high ranking just mean people will generate what's popular to get paid for it? Will there be money for unpopular truths somehow?

Yes and that affects all existing 'news' channels too. It comes down to general education levels and that has similar bad incentives in play.

Re: Making the news available at no cost is a victory

#59
post #31

That is unrealistic and not sustainable without an ad model or being funded by a company doing over a billion dollars in revenue already. Starting the timer and will stop it when they become non-free or switch to a paid model.

What is that based on?

Re: Making the news available at no cost is a victory

#60

The "Free News" model is certainly something I've struggled to solve. How exactly can you provide impartial, objective reporting when you cant afford the salaries? If the people arent interested in paying... what else can you do?

Wait, I never understood why we need "intrepid reporters" hired by a certain company to enter a war zone, for instance. Everyone has cameras now. They're ubiquitous.

What we really need is collaboration online to make sense of the footage being uploaded.

And the same for any kind of news. Why do we need the capitalist model again? Look at Wikipedia, Linux, open source software, and more.

Post reply on HN