zlacker

Does anyone pay for these kind of sites? I just can’t imagine doing it. I already have streaming subscriptions I just cannot imagine paying for news. I know that is a problem for the internet and journalism in general but what person will buy a Reuters sub? I can maybe see a NY Times sub or WSJ for some people but it has to be the best of the best. And still I personally wouldn’t do it. I don’t need to know news. It’s likely the news will make me feel worse, as opposed to my streaming subscriptions which will make me feel better.

>>JohnJa+(OP)
I'm not sure, but I would have thought it would be the opposite — you should not pay to read (or read at all) biased journals such as the NYT, WSJ, or Fox etc., and instead only pay attention to journals with minimal bias like Reuters and AP.

>>JohnJa+(OP)
I pay for NPR. I mean, I know that's different because their content isn't behind a paywall.

My mom pays for the NYT, but I think that's mostly for access to their cooking site.

I think these big news companies need to form a federation or something where you buy access at one and get rights to read over multiple different magazines.

>>JohnJa+(OP)
I suspect people whose living depends on keeping up with the news will pay. Consider Bloomberg, FT, WSJ, etc. Many people pay for those, and for good reason.

>>mywitt+s2
> I think these big news companies need to form a federation or something where you buy access at one and get rights to read over multiple different magazines.

Exactly! I tried coil.com for a while and it would be amazing if you could pay a monthly subscription and then it distributes to articles that you end up reading.

>>mywitt+s2
Apple News+? I know it's not necessarily the most popular or well thought of, but it's the only widespread platform (I'm aware of) that provides that kind of service for the price point I'm wiling to pay; i.e., Netflix-ish monthly fee.

>>JohnJa+(OP)
They seem to be aiming at professionals, although it also says they're after their current audience, whatever that is.

> the newly revamped Reuters.com www.reuters.com is hoping to attract professional audiences prepared to pay $34.99 per month for a deeper level of coverage and data on industry verticals

>>divean+A3
I'm essentially an Apple Fanboy but I've tried Apple News + a few times and I just don't like it. It spends too much time trying to suggest stories, bother me with news, there's ads I can't block, etc. so I just don't use it. Leave me alone! I don't want your suggestions. I don't want to discover new content or follow some trend. At least sequester those things off to some tab or setting or something.

>>yaksha+42
You can't equate WSJ/NYT with Reuters or AP.

They serve completely different purposes. The "biases" of them is hardly relevant unless you are routinely taking their opinion sections as fact.

>>ericma+87
I'm with you on those downsides, they all bother me too. The value add for me is that I get access to publications I'd have to pay separately for otherwise; e.g., WSJ, Wired, etc. My use case is primarily to open it and navigate to the content I want under the Subscriptions tab.

>>divean+ne
Yea definitely. I like the idea of it, I just wish I could turn off all suggestions and discovery unless I go search for something. Oh and turn off ads too if I'm paying.