Paying for news?

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
Post Reply
knightrider
Posts: 133
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 11:20 am

Paying for news?

Post by knightrider » Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:59 am

I get most of my news through Facebook by "liking" the various news outlets pages. I feel guilty not paying for any of it. Occasionally some news site will say I reached my 10 free articles /month limit and ask me to sign up for some $1/month subscription.

I have no problem paying that but it is such a nuisance to sign up for something so cheap. I can't be bothered going through a complex registration process so I can give them $1/month. And if I do that for dozens of news sites it is all the more a nuisance.

I am wondering what is a better way to pay for news? Or should I just enjoy the articles for free and not feel guilty about it?

bloom2708
Posts: 2843
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:08 pm
Location: Fargo, ND

Re: Paying for news?

Post by bloom2708 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:04 am

I think you will have to help define what "news" means to you. "News" has a very broad meaning today.

"I get all my news from Facebook..." likely means you aren't watching the Sunday morning news programs.

I would not pay $1 a month for different news sites when there are tons of sites and news aggregators that are free.

I have reduced my news consumption to about 2 minutes per day. That is a perfect amount for me.
Last edited by bloom2708 on Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
"We are here not to please but to provoke thoughtfulness" Unknown Boglehead

User avatar
Sandtrap
Posts: 2445
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 6:32 pm
Location: Hawaii😀 Northern AZ.😳

Re: Paying for news?

Post by Sandtrap » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:08 am

bloom2708 wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:04 am
I think you will have to help define what "news" means to you. "News" has a very broad meaning today.

"I get all my news from Facebook..." likely means you aren't watching the Sunday morning new programs.

I would not pay $1 a month for different news sites when there are tons of sites and news aggregators that are free.

I have reduced my news consumption to about 2 minutes per day.
That is a perfect amount for me.
Good one. :D
j

41Fin
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by 41Fin » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:12 am

I would just enjoy the free articles.

For the Washington Post there is a work around where I can click Reader view(Firefox) and I can read the article for free after I have used my monthly free limit.

There is a little book right next to the refresh button that I click to enter reader view.

I am not sure if this will work for other news sources but its worth a try.

SrGrumpy
Posts: 369
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 3:21 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by SrGrumpy » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:16 am

knightrider wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:59 am
I can't be bothered going through a complex registration process so I can give them $1/month. And if I do that for dozens of news sites it is all the more a nuisance.
How complex is it to type in your name, address and c/c number? You could have subscribed to a paper in the time it took you to write your peculiar post. I don't know if you need to do it for "dozens" of sites. Just choose one or two papers or magazines and leave it at that.

OTOH, if you really are a two-minute man then I don't see why you bothered asking.

You ask if you should feel guilty about being a freeloader, so clearly the ethical issue has occurred to you. Someone has to pay the journalists and editors. How do you feel about sharing your professional expertise for free?

bloom2708
Posts: 2843
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:08 pm
Location: Fargo, ND

Re: Paying for news?

Post by bloom2708 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:19 am

Oh, and most of the sites are ad supported.

If you see all those flashing and blinking ads on the top, sides, bottom and middle of websites, that is pure cash money.

So by visiting sites, you are paying. Paying with your clicks and ad views.
"We are here not to please but to provoke thoughtfulness" Unknown Boglehead

knightrider
Posts: 133
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 11:20 am

Re: Paying for news?

Post by knightrider » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:25 am

SrGrumpy wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:16 am
How complex is it to type in your name, address and c/c number?
For me it's a nuisance. Plus these sites sometimes require military strength passwords that expire every year or so. Some also require phone numbers for two-way authentication...

I feel the onus is on the news sites to ask Facebook to pay them. Facebook should charge us and a portion should then go to sites we read!

SrGrumpy
Posts: 369
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 3:21 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by SrGrumpy » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:30 am

knightrider wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:25 am
SrGrumpy wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:16 am
How complex is it to type in your name, address and c/c number?
For me it's a nuisance. Plus these sites sometimes require military strength passwords that expire every year or so. Some also require phone numbers for two-way authentication...
Seriously? Phone verification? Which sites do that? I've had a six-letter password for my WSJ subscription for a decade.
knightrider wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:25 am
I feel the onus is on the news sites to ask Facebook to pay them. Facebook should charge us and a portion should then go to sites we read!
Facebook already has enough control of the universe, thanks.

Caduceus
Posts: 1463
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:47 am

Re: Paying for news?

Post by Caduceus » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:42 am

Have you looked at FB's earnings recently? You should be asking them to pay you because you are the product. You're a captive consumer on their platform where they can serve you an unending number of advertisements. 8-)

123
Posts: 2542
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by 123 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:58 am

knightrider wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:59 am

... I can't be bothered going through a complex registration process so I can give them $1/month...
The ones that I've come across requesting subscriptions seem to offer you only a TRIAL month for around $1 and, if you don't cancel, then bill you their standard digital subscription price, often $10 or more a month. Signing up for any kind of on-going digital service that requires any kind of payment usually involves an on-going subscription that you have to make a diligent effort to cancel if you don't want on-going fees.
The closest helping hand is at the end of your own arm.

User avatar
JupiterJones
Posts: 2579
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:25 pm
Location: Nashville, TN

Re: Paying for news?

Post by JupiterJones » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:01 am

I subscribe to the NYT. More than a buck a month, certainly, but worth it to me to support what I consider to be quality journalism.

I do not have a Facebook account.
Stay on target...

User avatar
Toons
Posts: 12035
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:20 am
Location: Hills of Tennessee

Re: Paying for news?

Post by Toons » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:07 am

I subscribe to The Washington Post/Digital😎
"One does not accumulate but eliminate. It is not daily increase but daily decrease. The height of cultivation always runs to simplicity" –Bruce Lee

mervinj7
Posts: 370
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 3:10 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by mervinj7 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:14 am

JupiterJones wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:01 am
I subscribe to the NYT. More than a buck a month, certainly, but worth it to me to support what I consider to be quality journalism.

I do not have a Facebook account.
Same here. Also subscribe to the Washington Post through Amazon digital subscription.

runner3081
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2016 3:22 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by runner3081 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:14 pm

All online, all Reuters and a few local TV News sites.

Reuters is free and mostly unbiased.

avalpert
Posts: 6197
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by avalpert » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:20 pm

41Fin wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:12 am
I would just enjoy the free articles.

For the Washington Post there is a work around where I can click Reader view(Firefox) and I can read the article for free after I have used my monthly free limit.

There is a little book right next to the refresh button that I click to enter reader view.

I am not sure if this will work for other news sources but its worth a try.
Yeah, theft is much easier than paying.

Halicar
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2017 8:41 am
Location: Indiana

Re: Paying for news?

Post by Halicar » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:24 pm

Well, you get what you pay for. For daily national and international news, I subscribe to the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post. For commentary and in-depth reporting, I also read maybe a dozen other publications occasionally, from The National Review to The Nation. Many top-shelf publications will give you a handful of free articles per month, and if you have a big enough circuit, you can have a steady supply of high-quality journalism without bumping into the article limits.

User avatar
sunny_socal
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 4:22 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by sunny_socal » Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:02 pm

Facebook? :oops:

Try not let Google, Facebook, Twitter etc control your life. They actively censor and filter their 'new's according to their political slant. I find it best to read as many sources as possible, the truth is somewhere in between. Most 'news' these days is actually opinion.

quantAndHold
Posts: 1013
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:39 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by quantAndHold » Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:28 pm

knightrider wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:25 am
SrGrumpy wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:16 am
How complex is it to type in your name, address and c/c number?
For me it's a nuisance. Plus these sites sometimes require military strength passwords that expire every year or so. Some also require phone numbers for two-way authentication...
NY Times and Washington Post do not require military grade passwords, and I've used the same dumb passwords for each for many years. I know this because both passwords are variations on the names of pets that are have been dead for 10 years. I've never given either paper my phone number. But I pay more than $1/month, so there's that.

Personally, I'm willing to pay for real news, but YMMV.

Also, both my computer and my phone will auto-fill name, address, phone, email, and even CC#, if I want it to.

likegarden
Posts: 2380
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 5:33 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by likegarden » Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:43 pm

Watching ads in news programs probably lets you pay by buying those advertised products. Some news sites require that you turn off your ad blocker to see their news or to see their videos. I had once a bad experience with an ad having a virus which crashed my computer. Therefore, I keep my ad blocker active to protect myself from ads, and get my news elsewhere.

mak1277
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:26 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by mak1277 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:48 pm

I can't honestly think of anything internet-related that I would pay for. If bogleheads (or any other website I read) started charging tomorrow, I'd never be back.

User avatar
CAsage
Posts: 667
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 6:25 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by CAsage » Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:32 pm

Real Journalism costs money, and with print ad-supported journalists losing their jobs as newspapers close, there are fewer around. Most of what is on the internet is complete garbage - all "hot" junk to get you to click and read, with little credibility or depth ..... I subscribe to a couple good magazines and the digital LA Times, which are well worth paying for. I want them to stay in business!
Salvia Clevelandii "Winifred Gilman" my favorite. YMMV; not a professional advisor.

User avatar
sunny_socal
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 4:22 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by sunny_socal » Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:54 pm

CAsage wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:32 pm
Real Journalism costs money, and with print ad-supported journalists losing their jobs as newspapers close, there are fewer around. Most of what is on the internet is complete garbage - all "hot" junk to get you to click and read, with little credibility or depth ..... I subscribe to a couple good magazines and the digital LA Times, which are well worth paying for. I want them to stay in business!
I don't think any of the 'real' newspapers are worth paying for either, with the possible exception of the WSJ. Journalism is dead.

iamlucky13
Posts: 674
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 5:28 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by iamlucky13 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:39 pm

In my Facebook feed, I see a really random selection of news, and I think this is partly the fault of their attempts to find content their system predicts I will like.

Google News has been better for me, but still not great.

I also wanted to ensure we continue to get decent coverage of local news. This became particularly important for me during some very questionable dealings among the leadership of our local electric utility, when the local paper was the only source paying attention, as well as a previous scandal that led to a county official resigning ahead of an expected recall vote, and criminal charges for some of his lackeys. Other outlets covered the latter story, but only after the local paper broke it.

Those two cases were important factors in my decision to subscribe to the local paper. In my particular case, I get the Sunday edition in print, and have full access to the paper's website.

As a bonus, the editors generally do a better job of sifting the news for relevance and importance than my experience Google, Facebook, etc.

But not perfect, so I also use those other sources to help fill in gaps.
sunny_socal wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:54 pm
I don't think any of the 'real' newspapers are worth paying for either, with the possible exception of the WSJ. Journalism is dead.
I strongly disagree. Journalism is far from its heyday right now and has plenty of problems, but professional journalism provides the resources to investigate and report in detail, grounds the rest of the news reporting, and provides some semblance of quality control.

If we abandon all reporting that isn't advertising or special interest funded, then we'll only be left with clickbait and editorials masquerading as reporting.

Not everybody needs to subscribe to a paid news service, but I highly recommend those who take the news seriously find some outlet worth supporting.

User avatar
Pajamas
Posts: 2780
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 6:32 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by Pajamas » Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:57 pm

Most traditional news articles come from the news agencies, like Reuters, United Press International, Associated Press, and many others. Many of those news agencies provide the articles free on their own websites. No need to feel bad about not paying for them as they don't expect you to. What you might want to pay for is original content specific to a website that charges for it.

TheAccountant
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2017 4:21 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by TheAccountant » Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:13 pm

Bloomberg.

azurekep
Posts: 952
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:16 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by azurekep » Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:26 pm

To the OP's question, just pick the top one or two outlets you like and pay. That assuages the guilt because you're supporting journalism and you're supporting the best-quality journalism (in your opinion). That leaves you free to browse the other outlets until you decide one of them is better; shift your money to the new one(s) when the time comes. Rinse and repeat. You're basically making the outlets PROVE themselves to you. The one or two winners that stand out above the others during any reasonable length of time have earned your money.

As for other issues... I'd hazard a guess based on this and other threads that people read the news for different reasons. That guides their choices and also whether they pay. I'd maybe diagram it like this:
  • If you're just wanting a general sense of the world and are browsing various news outlets at random, don't pay.
  • If you are highly interested in local news, as in city- or town-level, consider paying.
  • If you are interested in news primarily during certain news cycles, don't pay, but reserve the right to pay if you feel the journalists are doing a bang-up job in their investigative or otherwise in-depth reporting.
  • If you are a "responsible citizen" and want to be informed on local, national and world events, or any combination therein, pay for at least a single publication that you have the most trust in. It is the responsible citizens that are the backbone supporters of journalism.*
* I recently read an article that somewhat contradicts this. It says millenials are the ones most likely these days to pay for news. They'll pay for digital news because they grew up paying for online services like Spotify. They'll pay for print news since they can carry the paper on the subway and make a political statement. Kind of like how some people carry an NPR bag around town. :mrgreen:

User avatar
sunny_socal
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 4:22 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by sunny_socal » Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:39 pm

iamlucky13 wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:39 pm
<snip>
I strongly disagree. Journalism is far from its heyday right now and has plenty of problems, but professional journalism provides the resources to investigate and report in detail, grounds the rest of the news reporting, and provides some semblance of quality control.

If we abandon all reporting that isn't advertising or special interest funded, then we'll only be left with clickbait and editorials masquerading as reporting.

Not everybody needs to subscribe to a paid news service, but I highly recommend those who take the news seriously find some outlet worth supporting.
You're talking about an ideal, how things used to be. These days there is little incentive for news organizations to pay journalists to actually investigate stories and double check their facts. It's too expensive and doesn't generate any revenue. It's much more cost effective to publish opinion pieces and to pump to out articles at a fast pace, they pull in more clicks (which == $$) Facts be damned. I wish this were not the case, but proper journalists tend to get fired these days.

Again, I'd pay for WSJ but certainly not any of the other examples in this thread. Fake News!

avalpert
Posts: 6197
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by avalpert » Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:48 pm

sunny_socal wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:39 pm
iamlucky13 wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:39 pm
<snip>
I strongly disagree. Journalism is far from its heyday right now and has plenty of problems, but professional journalism provides the resources to investigate and report in detail, grounds the rest of the news reporting, and provides some semblance of quality control.

If we abandon all reporting that isn't advertising or special interest funded, then we'll only be left with clickbait and editorials masquerading as reporting.

Not everybody needs to subscribe to a paid news service, but I highly recommend those who take the news seriously find some outlet worth supporting.
You're talking about an ideal, how things used to be. These days there is little incentive for news organizations to pay journalists to actually investigate stories and double check their facts. It's too expensive and doesn't generate any revenue. It's much more cost effective to publish opinion pieces and to pump to out articles at a fast pace, they pull in more clicks (which == $$) Facts be damned. I wish this were not the case, but proper journalists tend to get fired these days.

Again, I'd pay for WSJ but certainly not any of the other examples in this thread. Fake News!
Yeah, I strongly disagree with this assessment too and it seems to come to from a place of ignorance about the industry and dislike for the facts reported. Fake news indeed.

TravelGeek
Posts: 1182
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 3:23 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by TravelGeek » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:08 pm

iamlucky13 wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:39 pm

sunny_socal wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:54 pm
I don't think any of the 'real' newspapers are worth paying for either, with the possible exception of the WSJ. Journalism is dead.
I strongly disagree. Journalism is far from its heyday right now and has plenty of problems, but professional journalism provides the resources to investigate and report in detail, grounds the rest of the news reporting, and provides some semblance of quality control.

If we abandon all reporting that isn't advertising or special interest funded, then we'll only be left with clickbait and editorials masquerading as reporting.
I strongly agree. I am contributing to public broadcasting because of their news coverage (listening to Newshour right now) and subscribe to the online edition of the NYTimes. Thinking about adding a subscription to The Atlantic.

iamlucky13
Posts: 674
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 5:28 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by iamlucky13 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:34 pm

sunny_socal wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:39 pm
iamlucky13 wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:39 pm
<snip>
I strongly disagree. Journalism is far from its heyday right now and has plenty of problems, but professional journalism provides the resources to investigate and report in detail, grounds the rest of the news reporting, and provides some semblance of quality control.

If we abandon all reporting that isn't advertising or special interest funded, then we'll only be left with clickbait and editorials masquerading as reporting.

Not everybody needs to subscribe to a paid news service, but I highly recommend those who take the news seriously find some outlet worth supporting.
You're talking about an ideal, how things used to be. These days there is little incentive for news organizations to pay journalists to actually investigate stories and double check their facts. It's too expensive and doesn't generate any revenue. It's much more cost effective to publish opinion pieces and to pump to out articles at a fast pace, they pull in more clicks (which == $$) Facts be damned. I wish this were not the case, but proper journalists tend to get fired these days.

Again, I'd pay for WSJ but certainly not any of the other examples in this thread. Fake News!
No, I'm definitely not talking about an ideal, which is why I took a moment to concede serious concerns about journalism in general. I note that your original post was in response to a comment specifically about print newspapers, but I want to be clear that my response is not intended to be medium-specific, but a rationalization of subscription news services in general.

I also gave two examples where a news organization with paid journalists achieved a valuable public result that led me to subscribe. That's the incentive. To get money from people like me, they need to be reliable and informative, because they already know tens of millions of people like me running ad-blocker see almost none of their ads and never click on them.

You seem to have largely given up and decided to abandon the asylum to the insane. I'm not willing to do that, especially not as over time I gain a better sense of which outlets provide meaningful detail, focus on facts more than interpretation, and are consistently corroborated by other sources and later reporting.

But you haven't actually entirely given up, it seems, as you concede the WSJ may be worth paying for.

azurekep
Posts: 952
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:16 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by azurekep » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:39 pm

sunny_socal wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:39 pm
You're talking about an ideal, how things used to be. These days there is little incentive for news organizations to pay journalists to actually investigate stories and double check their facts. It's too expensive and doesn't generate any revenue. It's much more cost effective to publish opinion pieces and to pump to out articles at a fast pace, they pull in more clicks (which == $$) Facts be damned. I wish this were not the case, but proper journalists tend to get fired these days.
I've seen some folks in various threads badmouth some of the national newspapers citing they contain mostly opinion pieces. I think WaPo was one of the ones cited. I guess I don't understand that opinion. The opinion pieces at WaPo are clearly identified/identifiable as opinion pieces. The actual news is actual news, though it has a slant like all newspapers have.

One post even derided some of the news headlines as opinionated, but the headline writers are different folks than the actual writers of the articles. From what I gather, the news article writers are often horrified at what the headline folks put on top of their articles. (Not just talking about the Post, but all newspapers.)

As for little money or incentive for investigative reporting, I would agree with that. I doubt most journalists have any training in investigative reporting. But at least for certain big headline stories these days, the stories write themselves. No investigations needed since documentary information is leaked or otherwise handed to the papers. No need for scary meetings with Deep Throats in parking garages at night. And while some stories are based on anonymous sources rather than actual documents, the careful journalists verify with multiple sources, and the accounts are generally eventually proven true. Granted, this is just one subcategory of stories -- and at the national level -- but those tend to be the most important stories these days in terms of how they will be sorted out in history.

In a sense, circling back to the issue of payment, if we were to pay WaPo and the NYT for their investigative coverage, it would be kind of ironic since the stories were handed to them and they didn't have to do much investigating. But because they are among the "designated" papers to set the agenda for journalism nationwide, they are the ones that the leaks and documents go to. In that sense, it makes sense to pay to keep the papers in business.

User avatar
Alexa9
Posts: 408
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 9:41 am

Re: Paying for news?

Post by Alexa9 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:42 pm

I used to like The Economist but it's expensive. They have a 12 issues for $12 promo. You just have to remember to cancel. I wouldn't pay for any other news source. I put up with their ads enough though.

KlangFool
Posts: 6990
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by KlangFool » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:45 pm

OP,

I pay for www.stratfor.com. As for the rest, it is not worth my time reading them.

KlangFool

denovo
Posts: 3489
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2013 1:04 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by denovo » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:52 pm

sunny_socal wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:02 pm

the truth is somewhere in between
noooooooooo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation
Argument to moderation (Latin: argumentum ad temperantiam)is an informal fallacy which asserts that the truth must be found as a compromise between two opposite positions.

User avatar
randomizer
Posts: 650
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:46 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by randomizer » Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:11 am

I don't pay for news, not as a matter of principal but simply because I don't find it to be convenient. There is plenty of freely available content in any case. Only bummer is sometimes somebody will link to something on the Wall Street Journal, but their paywall is insurmountable, it would seem.

User avatar
cinghiale
Posts: 1055
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 4:37 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by cinghiale » Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:51 am

May I suggest...

http://www.realclearmarkets.com/

A few weeks ago there was one of those recurring “What websites do you like?” threads. Someone suggested this one. It’s a clearinghouse of news and opinion from across the ideological spectrum. It delivers a perfect “one stop shopping” site for headlines for those who have a bent toward economics and markets. I think there’s a companion site as well (http://www.realclearpolitics.com) with a fair amount of redundancy with the former.

A side note: Whoever recommended this site in the previous thread, Thank You!
-- Cinghiale | | "We don't see things as they are; we see them as we are." Anais Nin | | | "Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious." George Orwell

mouses
Posts: 2340
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:24 am

Re: Paying for news?

Post by mouses » Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:43 am

I read bbc.com with as they ask adblocking turned off. I used to pay for the nytimes, but then they distorted the heck out of the news during the Democratic Presidential primary, so I will never trust them again. The bbb is every bit as good and better since they don't cook the news.

User avatar
DaftInvestor
Posts: 3131
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:11 am

Re: Paying for news?

Post by DaftInvestor » Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:41 am

Personally I don't understand how one even gets news through "Facebook". Most of the articles I see are clickbait to junk but perhaps I'm not going to the right places.
As someone else stated - you can go directly to the ap.org or reuters.com to get to source stories that a lot of the media uses.
As far as what used to be considered good journalistic sources (NYT, etc.) - they've all become biased sensationalists over the last couple of years - I'd rather not support them.

As a side-note - you do realize you can just clear your browser's cookies to reset your 10-article limit on most of these sites? You might not want to lose all saved browser information but you could use a separate browser for news reading.

User avatar
JupiterJones
Posts: 2579
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:25 pm
Location: Nashville, TN

Re: Paying for news?

Post by JupiterJones » Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:32 am

DaftInvestor wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:41 am
As a side-note - you do realize you can just clear your browser's cookies to reset your 10-article limit on most of these sites? You might not want to lose all saved browser information but you could use a separate browser for news reading.
Or, in Chrome, you can open up an incognito window that has a completely different set of cookies (which are not kept around).

You can also try doing a Google search for the article title that you're interested in, which will often give you a link to a non-limited version of the article.

All that said, quality journalism is worth paying for.
Stay on target...

Rupert
Posts: 2670
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by Rupert » Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:56 am

JupiterJones wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:32 am
DaftInvestor wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:41 am
As a side-note - you do realize you can just clear your browser's cookies to reset your 10-article limit on most of these sites? You might not want to lose all saved browser information but you could use a separate browser for news reading.
Or, in Chrome, you can open up an incognito window that has a completely different set of cookies (which are not kept around).

You can also try doing a Google search for the article title that you're interested in, which will often give you a link to a non-limited version of the article.

All that said, quality journalism is worth paying for.
You can also access them from different browsers. You get 10 free articles (or whatever their limit is) on each browser. That said, I do pay for unlimited digital access to one newspaper. Please support good investigative journalism.

azurekep
Posts: 952
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:16 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by azurekep » Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:55 am

Since we've been talking about investigative journalism, I thought I'd link to an article that describes the techniques used to uncover a particular story. It could be applied to any official in any administration, so I hope it's taken in the non-political context that I'm offering it. It simply describes the great lengths that a particular news organization -- Politico in this case -- went to to uncover the private flights used by an official. Interesting reading.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... ets-215680

So, while investigative journalism isn't what it once was, it's still around.

knightrider
Posts: 133
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 11:20 am

Re: Paying for news?

Post by knightrider » Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:02 pm

DaftInvestor wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:41 am
Personally I don't understand how one even gets news through "Facebook".
Every news site has a facebook page where they post all their articles. So just "like" their page to start seeing their articles in your newsfeed. You can also comment on the articles. I like reading the comments. And if you comment , it sometimes will show up in your friends newsfeeds.

User avatar
Just sayin...
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 10:12 am

Re: Paying for news?

Post by Just sayin... » Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:57 pm

I pay for two news sources: WSJ Digital, and billoreilly.com. The rest is taken from various websites and from watching free youtube streams of actual events in full, uncolored by commentating opinion. Seems to work for me.

41Fin
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by 41Fin » Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:03 pm

avalpert wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:20 pm
41Fin wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:12 am
I would just enjoy the free articles.

For the Washington Post there is a work around where I can click Reader view(Firefox) and I can read the article for free after I have used my monthly free limit.

There is a little book right next to the refresh button that I click to enter reader view.

I am not sure if this will work for other news sources but its worth a try.
Yeah, theft is much easier than paying.
In this case it is. OP mentioned free with no guilt and I provided a method.

No different than the old method of googling the article title to break the paywall

avalpert
Posts: 6197
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by avalpert » Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:39 pm

41Fin wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:03 pm
avalpert wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:20 pm
41Fin wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:12 am
I would just enjoy the free articles.

For the Washington Post there is a work around where I can click Reader view(Firefox) and I can read the article for free after I have used my monthly free limit.

There is a little book right next to the refresh button that I click to enter reader view.

I am not sure if this will work for other news sources but its worth a try.
Yeah, theft is much easier than paying.
In this case it is. OP mentioned free with no guilt and I provided a method.

No different than the old method of googling the article title to break the paywall
Not sure how your approach to stealing it helps assuage the guilt

User avatar
JupiterJones
Posts: 2579
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:25 pm
Location: Nashville, TN

Re: Paying for news?

Post by JupiterJones » Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:13 am

avalpert wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:39 pm
41Fin wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:03 pm
avalpert wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:20 pm
41Fin wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:12 am
I would just enjoy the free articles.

For the Washington Post there is a work around where I can click Reader view(Firefox) and I can read the article for free after I have used my monthly free limit.

There is a little book right next to the refresh button that I click to enter reader view.

I am not sure if this will work for other news sources but its worth a try.
Yeah, theft is much easier than paying.
In this case it is. OP mentioned free with no guilt and I provided a method.

No different than the old method of googling the article title to break the paywall
Not sure how your approach to stealing it helps assuage the guilt
You might want to try to make your case that consuming media without paying for it is equivalent to "theft" or "stealing".
Stay on target...

avalpert
Posts: 6197
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Paying for news?

Post by avalpert » Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:46 am

JupiterJones wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:13 am
avalpert wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:39 pm
41Fin wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:03 pm
avalpert wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:20 pm
41Fin wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:12 am
I would just enjoy the free articles.

For the Washington Post there is a work around where I can click Reader view(Firefox) and I can read the article for free after I have used my monthly free limit.

There is a little book right next to the refresh button that I click to enter reader view.

I am not sure if this will work for other news sources but its worth a try.
Yeah, theft is much easier than paying.
In this case it is. OP mentioned free with no guilt and I provided a method.

No different than the old method of googling the article title to break the paywall
Not sure how your approach to stealing it helps assuage the guilt
You might want to try to make your case that consuming media without paying for it is equivalent to "theft" or "stealing".
They put up a paywall because they want people to pay to consume their intellectual property - in what world is finding a way to avoid paying for their service not theft? It's no different than jacking open a newspaper bin instead of putting in a quarter and taking out a paper.

If you don't find theft to be morally wrong and only care about getting caught then I'm open to hearing your moral philosophy - but to pretend you aren't stealing is ridiculous.

Post Reply