Partnering with publishers for a better journalism experience • Hacker News Board

Re: Partnering with publishers for a better journalism experience

#181

Post by SanchoPanda » Sat, Jul 06, 2019, 8:54 PM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #117

SanchoPanda wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blendle has been offering this service for years, though I believe they recently are backing away from it. I used it for a while several years ago, but I found using small transactions frequently to be very uncomfortable (as in off-putting, not so much inconvenient).

I vaguely recall Blendle. And checking, they want ~€2 per article, which is way too much. Consider that a digital subscription to The NY Times costs $250-$500 per year.[0] That's 365 days, with numerous articles published per day. But for argument sake, divide by 5000. That's just $0.05-$0.10 per article. 0) https://dannysullivan.com/new-york-times-subscription-3480

It was in the range of US$0.25-0.75, when I used it, but wouldn't you expect an a la cart offering to be more expensive than a bundle? The advantage is you dont have to pay that larger full year fee.

Re: Partnering with publishers for a better journalism experience

#182

Post by d2wa » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 12:29 PM UTC

This won’t do much good for all the small publishers you visit every day, though. It’s only for a select few large publishers.

Re: Partnering with publishers for a better journalism experience

#183

Post by d2wa » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 12:31 PM UTC

If you’re interested in this, make sure to check out Flattr and install their extension. It tracks your browsing over the course of a month, splits your monthly contribution among participating creators you’ve visited, and then deletes the collected data. Works for YouTube, domains, Twitter, GitHub, Twitch, and more. You set the monthly budget. https://flattr.com/contributors

Re: Partnering with publishers for a better journalism experience

#184

Post by d2wa » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 12:39 PM UTC

quest88 wrote: post #91

rchaud wrote: post #82

It's about time somebody tried this. $5/mo. is fair; I don't need a million sites to be in the catalog, but I would like a bit more variety eventually. People who complain about "modern journalism", take note. If this takes off, publications will be less incentivized to post those godawful clickbait articles that have soured the Internet reading experience. I'll read the Atlantic and Vox, but Buzzfeed is a no-no, unl…

I believe Google tried something like this and then shut it down.

Contributor was a micro-payments subscription thing were you could buy a subscription and actively participate in the regular ad-exchanges. The idea was that you could support websites by outbidding crappy advertising on Google’s platform and see pictures of cats (or whitespace) instead. It doesn’t take much money to outbid just about every advertising you’d see in a normal month. https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/google-contributor.html

They’ve repurposed it as an “ad removal pass” service were you pay way more money per month per website that you want to remove ads on. It’s limited to large publishers only. https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/google-contributor-twopointoh.ht...

Re: Partnering with publishers for a better journalism experience

#185

Post by Touche » Mon, Jul 08, 2019, 2:50 PM UTC

detritus wrote: post #156

brians wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don’t. You, the end user, do. They’re selling you a tool to do that.

They provide an entire replacement economy from which they profit 5% of transactions, I don't see them as being innocent bystanders here.

"Innocent" implies there is an injustice / crime of some sort taking place, but there is not in this case.

Re: Partnering with publishers for a better journalism experience

#186

Post by rusk » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 2:44 PM UTC

SamWhited wrote: post #180

rusk wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

have you got a link to such a page?

No, I can't actually find one for this product. I don't know how they announced it, however. It does seem to be the same kind of trial thing they've done in the past though.

> I can't actually find one for this

I found one for you [0]

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20353752

Re: Partnering with publishers for a better journalism experience

#187

Post by detritus » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 6:46 PM UTC

Touche wrote: post #185

detritus wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They provide an entire replacement economy from which they profit 5% of transactions, I don't see them as being innocent bystanders here.

"Innocent" implies there is an injustice / crime of some sort taking place, but there is not in this case.

I didn't mean to imply 'crime' but I'll accept 'injustice' in the context of the post I was responding to.

Re: Partnering with publishers for a better journalism experience

#188

Post by Touche » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 6:49 PM UTC

detritus wrote: post #187

Touche wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Innocent" implies there is an injustice / crime of some sort taking place, but there is not in this case.

I didn't mean to imply 'crime' but I'll accept 'injustice' in the context of the post I was responding to.

What's the injustice?