I am just wondering if sites can have affiliated material subscriptions like with hn have free clickthrough for 2$ a month or 5$ a month to all sites from where the articles originate from.
The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely
71–80 of 345 posts
Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely
#72I am just wondering if sites can have affiliated material subscriptions like with hn have free clickthrough for 2$ a month or 5$ a month to all sites from where the articles originate from.
Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, we do not exactly have an oversupply of WSJ caliber journalism.
To also be fair, WSJ is hardly high caliber journalism, and since the sale to Murdoch has degraded significantly in quality
I would disagree. Their opinion pages have become more conservative, but their business news and investigative reporting is just as good as it always has been.
Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, we do not exactly have an oversupply of WSJ caliber journalism.
To also be fair, WSJ is hardly high caliber journalism, and since the sale to Murdoch has degraded significantly in quality
And therin lies the situation. WSJ is worth very little to the very many. I see it as just another editorialized website. Was it always that way? No. Paper editions of the wall street journal were very good, on occasion. Web editions in the new age of journalism, not even close. No where near worth even trying to go around their paywall.
Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
The amount you want to pay for news is not anywhere close to the value it is providing you or that they make from ad revenue.
Let's say you're standing in a field strewn with gold bars. A man comes up to you and offers to sell you a gold bar for $400,000. You point out that you are standing among hundreds of gold bars, all of them free for the taking. He points out that it was a lot of hard work extracting gold from thousands of tons of ore, casting it, assaying it, etc. Just because something cost a lot to make, doesn't mean it's worth a l…
But I don't live in a world surrounded by gold bars. I live in a world where news comes from Buzzfeed and CNN and Fox News and less scrupulous "news" organizations who are only looking towards the next eyeball. I am surrounded by bars of iron. Your parable simply doesn't match the world I live in.
Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely
#76Has any publisher tried out a paywall along the lines of the following? "Hey, you've spent 29 hours so far this year reading 119 articles. Suggested donation: $62"
Do you realise the kind of tracking that entails?
Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would give you HN gold if it existed (now we just need a bookmarklet/extension to automate this). Do we know that this will still work on Monday? Maybe this will also be closed and you'll need a special link?
Instead of buying internet points for someone who figured out a little hack to access journalism, maybe you could instead pay for journalism?
A noble thought. My problem comes not from the fact that I don't want to pay but rather from the fact that it's super annoying.
What if my browser could just say "article will be 25 cents?" and I could say y/n? But instead, I have to sign up for a service, hand over my credit card, blah blah, and now you've wasted enough of my time that it was worth just me stealing it.
I'm pretty convinced it's just aUX thing.
Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
The amount you want to pay for news is not anywhere close to the value it is providing you or that they make from ad revenue.
Let's say you're standing in a field strewn with gold bars. A man comes up to you and offers to sell you a gold bar for $400,000. You point out that you are standing among hundreds of gold bars, all of them free for the taking. He points out that it was a lot of hard work extracting gold from thousands of tons of ore, casting it, assaying it, etc. Just because something cost a lot to make, doesn't mean it's worth a l…
[deleted]
Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would give you HN gold if it existed (now we just need a bookmarklet/extension to automate this). Do we know that this will still work on Monday? Maybe this will also be closed and you'll need a special link?
Instead of buying internet points for someone who figured out a little hack to access journalism, maybe you could instead pay for journalism?
Can't reply to taek, but https://blendle.com/ lets you pay per article. There's an HN sign up code somewhere but couldn't find it on my phone
Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Instead of buying internet points for someone who figured out a little hack to access journalism, maybe you could instead pay for journalism?
A noble thought. My problem comes not from the fact that I don't want to pay but rather from the fact that it's super annoying. What if my browser could just say "article will be 25 cents?" and I could say y/n? But instead, I have to sign up for a service, hand over my credit card, blah blah, and now you've wasted enough of my time that it was worth just me stealing it. I'm pretty convinced it's just aUX thing.
See, I look at this the exact opposite way - if I have to decide whether each individual article is worth paying for, I'm probably not going to read any articles. Its much easier for me to pay $10 a month and know that I can, with zero friction, read whatever article I want from the publications I respect. We're talking about the Wall Street Journal here; odds that they're going to only occasionally publish something I'm interested in are pretty low - I'm either interested in subscribing or I'm not.