this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
81 points (91.8% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35937 readers
773 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I really dislike ad driven publications. I'm not opposed to paying for quality news publication, but for something like NYT, there's only a couple articles a month I come across that I'm really interested in reading. There problem is that there's 4-5 other paywalled publications where I have that same issue. I'm interested in their content, I just can't justify the subscription price for the small amount of content from them I'll actually consume, and I really can't justify paying subscriptions for 4-5 publications at once.

I would pay $5-10 a month for a news aggregator for paywalled publications. It could be set up in a way that the publications get paid per view of their articles, it could be opened up to independent writers as well (e.g. integrate your substack with it). Maybe even an additional fee that includes digital magazine publications as well.

I can't imagine it would be worse for the industry (unlike Spotify), as it already seems like journalism/news is hovering above collapse. They would be making money off of people who weren't providing revenue previously.

all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CharlestonChewbacca@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)
[–] qooqie@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I use this, it’s quite good. No complaints about it, no ads, reading articles doesn’t feel like a chore. I definitely recommend it

[–] alucard@sopuli.xyz 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Mostly… the advertising is disguised as top 10 articles with Amazon links. 50% journalism 40% articles 10% Reddit copied BuzzFeed “articles”

[–] drcarrot@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I feel like 50% journalism is pretty good these days

[–] alucard@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago
[–] jeanofthedead@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

And it’s easy as pie to block those channels.

[–] qooqie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I guess that’s true, but I’m not one to ever click on buzz feed articles and they are usually quite clearly marked

[–] schaeferpp@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't want to read full magazines. I need more or less what an RSS reader can do. But in good.

This isn't just full magazines...

[–] carnha@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'd love to try out Apple News, but as far as I can tell you can only access it on an Apple device, there's no web access :(

[–] berkeleyblue@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also it’s not available in Switzerland so I can’t use it unfortunately…

The same btw goes gor movies in my oppinion. Why do I have to have 3 Streaming services for a couple hundred movies when I have 70 Million songs on evey streaming services? I hope this will eventually change…

[–] candybrie@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Movies and TV used to be 1 streaming service. So careful what you wish for. We might end up with a streaming service per record label.

Literally this. I've never used it, but it sounds like what the OP is looking for.

[–] Izzgo@kbin.social 33 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It should be noted that, in the US at least, your library card will often give you online access to many publications.

[–] Sebbie@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

My entire state has access to NYT, Chicago tribune, USA today, a ton of other popular newspapers and our local newspaper through their libraries for free.

Time for a library card.

[–] CombatWombat1212@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are u fr why don't they say this in school man that's awesome

[–] MrDetermination@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Check out Kanopy and Libby while you're at it.

[–] schaeferpp@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This. Is. Exactly. What. I. Wish. For. A. Very. Long. Time.

Nowadays every news site has paywalls. I'm willing to pay for good work, but if I pay a single news provider, I'm missing too much. Nobody is willing to pay for every publisher. Even if an article is just a few cents I neither want to be annoyed with the payment process nor do I want to manually keep track of how much I spent for news in a month.

We really need a platform providing a news flat rate, aggregating most larger publishers.

[–] Toby_2222@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

I mean this isn't exactly the answer you're looking for but in the UK we do, the BBC doesn't have ads and the cost is covered by taxes rather than paying a "Spotify premium" subscription

[–] brechmos@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I recently found ground.news. it is an interesting news aggregator sight in that it combined multiple sources for each story. It doesn't really answer some of your needs but for each story it shows you which sources are pay-walled and which ones aren't.

[–] Lorela@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Omg this is exactly what I've been looking for. I do a lot of media monitoring for work and have been using MBFC to try to measure how reliable my current Google Alerts are, because it throws up some weird and wild news sources.

[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're use of spotify as an example is a good reason. Journalism isn't making money and Spotify's royalties are (or at least were not long ago) the lowest amongst the music streaming services. The ads on their own sites pay a lot more than any aggregator would give them.

[–] wolfpack86@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I think this would actually drive shittier quality.

Current models, like the preceding model of physical paper delivery, have a relatively fixed income stream from the subscriber base. They make the same amount of money whether the news day is "Japan Attacks Pearl Harbor" level or whether the most interesting story is that a German Shepherd won the AKC dog show.

Under a service that aggregates and pays a minor amount per click, how does NYT stand out above WaPo? Or Ap or Reuters? Click bait headlines and incomplete stories so they can write multiple and get more clicks, because each click is not worth very much.

I think the better model for NYT et al would be to offer a punch card like option: 10 articles, $15... or whatever. They should have enough data to determine what the average number of articles read is, per subscriber, to determine what the tipping point is, and capture some new pay-as-you go subscribers.

[–] Carter@feddit.uk 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 year ago

notices the .uk on your username

[–] davetapley@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

This seems like a direction https://ground.news/ could go in.

[–] Hyggyldy@sffa.community 2 points 1 year ago

What, something that keeps removing features?

[–] what_is_a_name@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I agree the convenience would be great. But the reason it’s rare is that the business model does not work out for the newspapers.

This would lead to reduced revenue for the newspapers.

We already live in the world where news is behind paywall and disinformation is free. This would lead to collapse of more newspapers and further deterioration of the landscape.

We need a better model than Spotify to apply to news.

[–] ilickfrogs@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Because good journalism is expensive and the space is so much more competitive in the digital age. Also greed, usually it's greed preventing us from having good things.

[–] gorysubparbagel@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Something reasonably close but not exactly that would be feedly

[–] davetapley@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It could be set up in a way that the publications get paid per view of their articles

This is idea behind the BAT token and the Brave Browser¹. Unfortunately it won't break through paywalls, but ad blocking is pretty good and in theory is less guilt.

¹ although, there is this

[–] Maelstrom@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I think Inkl does exactly what you want