Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model • Hacker News Board

Re: Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model

#11

Post by numakerg » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:05 AM UTC

__initbrian__ wrote: post #9

mirimir wrote: post #2

> Like many, I was wrong about the subscription model for the news media. I thought that a possible scheme for subscriptions could be: one for national media, in the $12–20 a month range, another, less expensive ($5–$9/month) for local news, and the last one for specialized content, whether it is a business or a leisure publication. I can't imagine how that could ever have worked. Back in the day, I mostly read stuff…

Like this? https://www.inkl.com/

I wonder why it's mobile only, since I'd love something like this in a web interface. Maybe they data mined from your device is factored into the cost?

Re: Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model

#12

Post by pessimizer » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:06 AM UTC

factotvm wrote: post #4

pessimizer wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to pay for all of the articles I read, a large number of them are terrible and shouldn't be encouraged.

I don’t want to pay for all the meals I eat, a large number of them are terrible... So I don’t go back. But you have to pay for what you eat.

A lot of articles don't nourish me, they make me stupider. I wouldn't pay for a poisoned meal.

Re: Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model

#13

Post by numakerg » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:09 AM UTC

> Netflix eats online news

If Netflix is eating online news both in terms of attention and money then why wouldn't they partner with Netflix? I know a few seniors that are reluctant to switch because it doesn't have news or weather.

Re: Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model

#14

Post by mirimir » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:16 AM UTC

__initbrian__ wrote: post #9

mirimir wrote: post #2

> Like many, I was wrong about the subscription model for the news media. I thought that a possible scheme for subscriptions could be: one for national media, in the $12–20 a month range, another, less expensive ($5–$9/month) for local news, and the last one for specialized content, whether it is a business or a leisure publication. I can't imagine how that could ever have worked. Back in the day, I mostly read stuff…

Like this? https://www.inkl.com/

Yeah, like that!

I'm impressed. Older services like that were asking $1 or so per article.

Edit: I do see The Wall Street Journal, which is cool. But do they include The NY Times?

Re: Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model

#15

Post by the_trapper » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:59 AM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #12

factotvm wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t want to pay for all the meals I eat, a large number of them are terrible... So I don’t go back. But you have to pay for what you eat.

A lot of articles don't nourish me, they make me stupider. I wouldn't pay for a poisoned meal.

To continue this analogy. When I go to a restaurant and order a steak I don't get told by the waiter that I should really be eating vegan gluten free instead.

What really bothers me the most about modern "news" is that a lot of it is really just biased political commentary and editorials masquerading as news.

Re: Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model

#16

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:15 AM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #2

> Like many, I was wrong about the subscription model for the news media. I thought that a possible scheme for subscriptions could be: one for national media, in the $12–20 a month range, another, less expensive ($5–$9/month) for local news, and the last one for specialized content, whether it is a business or a leisure publication. I can't imagine how that could ever have worked. Back in the day, I mostly read stuff…

> Now it's mainly from HN. But either way, I'd need perhaps 20-40 subscriptions.

No, you should be paying one subscription, to HN, which should be making arrangements with the news sources. Paying for subscriptions from the sources when HN is your gateway is like readers directly subscribing to wire services when they get their news by opening up a newspaper.

The old media “portals” have been displaced and become sources consumed through other portals, but business models haven't fully adapted.

Re: Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model

#17

Post by ehnto » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:39 AM UTC

the_trapper wrote: post #15

pessimizer wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of articles don't nourish me, they make me stupider. I wouldn't pay for a poisoned meal.

To continue this analogy. When I go to a restaurant and order a steak I don't get told by the waiter that I should really be eating vegan gluten free instead. What really bothers me the most about modern "news" is that a lot of it is really just biased political commentary and editorials masquerading as news.

Or just as insidious, thinly veiled advertisements.

Re: Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model

#18

Post by factotvm » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:44 AM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #12

factotvm wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t want to pay for all the meals I eat, a large number of them are terrible... So I don’t go back. But you have to pay for what you eat.

A lot of articles don't nourish me, they make me stupider. I wouldn't pay for a poisoned meal.

I know of no restaurants that would charge you if you got food poisoning. But saying that when you ordered a colossal burger it went straight to your waistline isn't a good excuse not to pay. Don't go in if you don't want to pay.

Re: Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model

#19

Post by factotvm » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:46 AM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #7

factotvm wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t want to pay for all the meals I eat, a large number of them are terrible... So I don’t go back. But you have to pay for what you eat.

With the monthly digital subscription model, you end up paying for all you could possibly ever eat . Most of which you could never eat. Unless you automated the "eating", and resold what you didn't need. Which is disgusting, and in the case of online media, almost certainly illegal. But that is an interesting idea. Buy digital subscriptions to every media outlet that you'd ever want to read, and resell page views, us…

What you were suggesting in the parent comment was a pay-as-you-go system wherein you pay something like $0.10 per article.

Re: Consumer Trends That Destroyed Media’s Business Model

#20

Post by MRD85 » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:55 AM UTC

factotvm wrote: post #4

pessimizer wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to pay for all of the articles I read, a large number of them are terrible and shouldn't be encouraged.

I don’t want to pay for all the meals I eat, a large number of them are terrible... So I don’t go back. But you have to pay for what you eat.

I doesn't physically cost any practical amount of money to read an article, a tiny amount of processing power and data transfer. A physical meal costs orders of magnitude more.

I understand why we should pay for articles but if you enforce payment then you'll see a flood of poorly written click bait and a race to the bottom.