Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple News Service Said to Feature WSJ for $10 a month, Without NYT or WP

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–69 of 69 posts

Re: Apple News Service Said to Feature WSJ for $10 a month, Without NYT or WP

#61

Post by Traster »

I think it's so important that we move towards a model where we can subscribe to a selection of news sources for a reasonable amount. As others have pointed out, individual newspapers are as much as a netflix or spotify subscription - which may be justified. But even if everyone does move to a subscription model, it's bad for our society for everyone to have 1 source of news.

It's even more unhealthy if I can't have an informed discussion about the news of the day with you because you got your news from the NYT and I got my news from Times of London and we got two entirely different sides of the story and we can't go and see each other's sources of information. That sounds to me like a terrible situation to put ourselves in.

I would much rather pay $10 bucks a month and know that that revenue is distributed amongst the papers I read in proportion to how long I've spent reading each article- in exactly the same way Youtube tracks watched minutes.

Re: Apple News Service Said to Feature WSJ for $10 a month, Without NYT or WP

#62

Post by sneeze-slayer »

Traster wrote: post #61

I think it's so important that we move towards a model where we can subscribe to a selection of news sources for a reasonable amount. As others have pointed out, individual newspapers are as much as a netflix or spotify subscription - which may be justified. But even if everyone does move to a subscription model, it's bad for our society for everyone to have 1 source of news. It's even more unhealthy if I can't have…

Haven't newspapers always been like that? If you want to see someone else's source of information, you would have to go and buy that days copy of the paper.

Newspapers seem to be the original subscription model--you only have one source of news.

Re: Apple News Service Said to Feature WSJ for $10 a month, Without NYT or WP

#63

Post by sneeze-slayer »

esun wrote: post #20

Former newspaper industry employee here... This is a mistake by the WSJ. They would be better served by reducing their ridiculous digital subscription fees and skipping Apple's extortionate gatekeeping "service". The newspaper industry was founded on (although nobody really understood it until the invention of the internet) being the intermediary between consumers and companies. In 2019 the business has changed to co…

The WSJ online costs $39 per month, but the print copy costs $43 per month. It's pretty crazy, because I would expect the physical paper to cost much more than the online version.

Re: Apple News Service Said to Feature WSJ for $10 a month, Without NYT or WP

#64

Post by tzs »

Traster wrote: post #61

I think it's so important that we move towards a model where we can subscribe to a selection of news sources for a reasonable amount. As others have pointed out, individual newspapers are as much as a netflix or spotify subscription - which may be justified. But even if everyone does move to a subscription model, it's bad for our society for everyone to have 1 source of news. It's even more unhealthy if I can't have…

> It's even more unhealthy if I can't have an informed discussion about the news of the day with you because you got your news from the NYT and I got my news from Times of London and we got two entirely different sides of the story and we can't go and see each other's sources of information

Probably not the best example. With the NYT and the Times of London, you might get different perspectives on a news story (as opposed to an opinion piece), but they will both be mostly correct. You should be able to have informed discussion.

To make your example work, you need something more like an AlterNet reader trying to have an informed discussion with an InfoWars reader.

Re: Apple News Service Said to Feature WSJ for $10 a month, Without NYT or WP

#65

Post by gonehome »

ac29 wrote: post #36
tptacek wrote: post #3

Broken record: online newspaper subscriptions are super cheap and are remarkably useful; when you can click around a newspaper site without popups, it starts to makes sense to use them as your news portal, which quickly weans you off lower-quality free sites like CNN. Like the people that get the sleep apnea devices and won't shut up about how much better their life is, I'm constantly (and noisily) surprised by how s…

I suppose "super cheap" is relative: WSJ: $100-$150/year WP: $187/year NYT: $195/year All of these seem to be promotional rates of some sort, or I lucked out and they're all on sale (unlikely). So, that puts them at or above the cost of a TV or Music streaming subscription. If you're subscribing to "a bunch", that's pretty expensive. edit: I should add, I believe all of these prices are a "with ads" price, which argu…

Yeah the “with ads” is what led me to cancel mine - those prices are already high relative to other subscription services and they include ads?

Canceling the nytimes was also about as difficult as canceling Sirius XM radio (forcing a phone call). One level up from canceling a gym membership.

Maybe apple can force them to be better.

Re: Apple News Service Said to Feature WSJ for $10 a month, Without NYT or WP

#66

Post by donarb »

untog wrote: post #6

I'm confused why WSJ, of all publications, is jumping on board here. A look at their subscription page shows me that the cheapest option is $15 a month. This Apple News subscription product is going to be $10 a month and Apple is taking 50% of that. I get the argument that Apple News will expose you to a much larger audience, but that level of revenue cut is... significant. Why wouldn't I cancel my WSJ subscription a…

50% has been a standard in print publishing for a hundred years.

Re: Apple News Service Said to Feature WSJ for $10 a month, Without NYT or WP

#67

Post by acct1771 »

tzs wrote: post #64
Traster wrote: post #61

I think it's so important that we move towards a model where we can subscribe to a selection of news sources for a reasonable amount. As others have pointed out, individual newspapers are as much as a netflix or spotify subscription - which may be justified. But even if everyone does move to a subscription model, it's bad for our society for everyone to have 1 source of news. It's even more unhealthy if I can't have…

> It's even more unhealthy if I can't have an informed discussion about the news of the day with you because you got your news from the NYT and I got my news from Times of London and we got two entirely different sides of the story and we can't go and see each other's sources of information Probably not the best example. With the NYT and the Times of London, you might get different perspectives on a news story (as op…

Careful with that appeal to authority.

Re: Apple News Service Said to Feature WSJ for $10 a month, Without NYT or WP

#68

Post by jurassic »

pvg wrote: post #60
ac29 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose "super cheap" is relative: WSJ: $100-$150/year WP: $187/year NYT: $195/year All of these seem to be promotional rates of some sort, or I lucked out and they're all on sale (unlikely). So, that puts them at or above the cost of a TV or Music streaming subscription. If you're subscribing to "a bunch", that's pretty expensive. edit: I should add, I believe all of these prices are a "with ads" price, which argu…

I'm not sure where you are getting these prices, NYT's promotional pricing is $52 a year ($1/wk), WaPo is under $10/mo, less if you happen to have Amazon Prime.

For the most part, the promotional price is irrelevant to my decision to subscribe. What matters to me is the full freight pricing that I will be charged for my lifetime as a customer.

If I would be willing to subscribe at the promotional price but not at the regular price, they have a sales process that is designed to capture and retain my subscription dollars by obfuscating the true price at the time of opt-in and making it hard to unsubscribe after I realize how much it actually costs. Neither of these seem great from the reader's perspective.

Re: Apple News Service Said to Feature WSJ for $10 a month, Without NYT or WP

#69

Post by carbine »

steve19 wrote: post #40
peteretep wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Economist > Its when they want both seo/viral traffic AND my subscription dollars that annoys me. Have you followed TE on Facebook or Twitter? There’s plenty of clickbait there, although they do now hive some of it off to 1843 Magazine and Espresso

I have not, my assessment is based on the paper magazine. Sad to hear they are chasing clicks.

They specifically create free content for social media.
Post reply on HN