Yeah, I don’t get it. Do people want actual journalism to go out of business?

> Do people want actual journalism to go out of business?

Former Google Contributor user reporting in! I absolutely do not want normal journalism going out of business, but I’m not going to subscribe to Bloomberg or FT or any of those sites on a recurring basis for one article. I love the idea of paying a non-subscription for one thing, occasionally, though!

	▲	Barbing 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Don’t Bloomberg & FT have a number of well-written, informative articles every month? Maybe you just want the exclusives which even then they often break stuff (at least Gurman on Bloomberg, especially if you care about Apple/OpenAI).
	▲	iamnothere 6 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Yes, I also liked the crowdfunding model that the defunct YC startup Beacon Reader proposed. It’s too bad they didn’t make it.
	▲	tensor 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Haha you couldn't pay me to read Bloomberg.

▲

imzadi 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'd be more than happy to pay for the day's paper when I want to read it, assuming it is just that, I pay for a particular day's paper and I get access to the whole paper without having to subscribe, register, or give up my personal information. If I could buy a paper online the same way I could in a 7-11, I absolutely would.

	▲	Barbing 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Goofy option since not many better for privacy: Could ask a friend to subscribe for you and read the PDF from Telegram. Only download this ROM if you own the original cartridge!

▲

the__alchemist 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They have made a bed to lie in. Kagi is worth paying for; the vast majority of news sides are targeted at people who don't think critically, and serve a narrow-scope of corporate narratives.

I love high-quality journalism (Mainstream sources of the past; a few current gems like Quanta and PBS; you can find other exceptions). I have explicitly bumped the priority of the high-quality sources in search, and blocked or subdued some of the low quality ones which come up frequently.

▲

OroPla 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Didn't journalism go out of business decades ago and now not even pretends to be journalism anymore? I feel it has gotten so bad that most younger people alive today do not even realize what journalism is supposed to be: only report the facts, never add your own opinion to the facts, if there is more than one side, ask each side and report what each side has to say without omitting or adding anything. These are just some super basic features of journalism that do not seem to exist anywhere anymore.

▲

john_strinlai 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>Didn't journalism go out of business decades ago and now not even pretends to be journalism anymore?

it seems rarer, for sure. perhaps the quantity of good journalism is the same but there's a lot more trash to sift through?

but i wouldnt say it went out of business or anything. there's some fantastic journalists out there still.

▲

mrngld 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think that sort of journalism has largely been purged from the traditional sources and has ended up on Substack, or their own site. It's transitioned from "I can trust Brand X" to "I can trust that individual because of their track record and the way they reliably report things that don't align with their own world view", etc. Glenn Greenwald is an example. The story around why he had to depart The Intercept (which he helped found!) is everything that's wrong with modern journalism that has pushed people like Glenn to places like Substack.

Bringing it back to paywalls and Kagi and paying for content, Glenn has 3 kids and I think a bunch of dogs and they all need to eat.

▲

rvz 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Didn't journalism go out of business decades ago and now not even pretends to be journalism anymore?

So Daily Mail, Bloomberg, CNBC, BBC, CNN, ABC News, New York Times, FOX and many others all went out of business decades ago?

That is breaking news to me.

	▲	john_strinlai 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		the parent's argument is that those companies don't really do journalism anymore, not the the companies themselves went out of business. they are more like entertainment networks. and, for at least some of the ones you listed, i would have to agree that the bar for what they call "journalism" is not very high, and the concept of journalistic integrity appears to be a pretty low priority.

▲

tensor 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Do you really think people are paying for these sites? I pay for my local newspaper, but I'm not going to be subscribing to dozens of newspapers, one is more than enough.

If newspapers want more traffic they need to get together and offer bundle deals, because expecting people to pay $20 a month subscriptions for multiple newspapers is a fantasy.

▲

Barbing 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Is the Apple News model sufficient?

	▲	tensor 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think there should be more of it. Negatives for the Apple News model is that it's Apple only and there is no ad-free tier. It's also app locked so you can't use ad-blockers. But yes, something like Apple News with an ad-free tier that works with standard websites. E.g. the participating news sites should recognize whatever service token you have and serve unpaywalled content.

▲

hootz 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Paywalling all content sucks, it just makes me leave the website. I pay for a news website from my country that gives me extra cool stuff like opinion articles and cultural highlights from my city, not because they paywall the basic news.

▲

bee_rider 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Somebody’s got to be paid to write the basic news articles. Maybe we could have a government funded “basic news” (although there are obvious concerns that that might turn into a propaganda service).

▲

eightysixfour 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

We could call it the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and it could directly fund local news stations. It could be a hybrid public/non-profit where the government funds some, members stations fund some, and donations fund the rest.

Member stations could be responsible for more local content and be a part of a network that syndicates content from other stations.

It could cover more than just news though - children's programming, think pieces, deeper dives into government.

Man, that would be great.

Edit: Sorry, didn’t mean this to be as sarcastic towards you OP, more annoyed we defunded it last year.

	▲	bee_rider 3 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Edit: Sorry, didn’t mean this to be as sarcastic towards you OP, more annoyed we defunded it last year. That’s ok I was already doing the whole “obliquely reference things that already exist in the abstract as if they were a novel idea” bit; you doubling down on it kind of makes it better.

▲

hootz 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

They do get paid, they are employees and get a salary. I pay for the premium plan and that funds the company.

	▲	rcMgD2BwE72F 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Too bad the new Kagi settings does not support allowing some paywalled domains to show up.