Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Media Businesses The Almighty Buck News

Ask Slashdot: What Online News Is Worth Paying For? 361

schnell writes "The increasing prevalence of online news paywalls and 'nag walls' (e.g. you can only read so many articles per month) has forced me to divide those websites into two categories: those that offer content that is unique or good enough to pay for vs. those that don't. Examples of the former for me included The Economist and Foreign Policy, while other previous favorite sites The New York Times and even my hometown Seattle Times have lost my online readership entirely. I also have a secret third category — sites that don't currently pay/nag wall, but I would pay for if I had to — Ars Technica and Long Form come to mind. What news/aggregation sites are other Slashdotters out there willing to pay for, and why? What sites that don't charge today would you pay for if you had to? Or, knowing this crowd, are the majority just opposed to paying for any web news content on principle?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ask Slashdot: What Online News Is Worth Paying For?

Comments Filter:
  • by GeekWithAKnife ( 2717871 ) on Wednesday February 05, 2014 @06:26AM (#46160633)

    I for one will be happy to pay for in-depth, impartial analysis that takes complex matters and explains them to me simply.

    There are enough people out there interested in different things, there's a market there, somewhere. Regardless of that I'm sure most people are sick and tired of tabloids, newspapers with a political agendas and media moguls pushing their views.

    I'll pay if you empower me with no BS knowledge and thus a real chance of understanding. Ask me, the potential buyer what I care about, what I'd like to know about and what I do not care for.

    Information should be free, instead of asking how you can charge for information maybe you should consider how to monetize transferring free information? wait a moment that's call an ISP. Tax the ISP? -do you see where this is going?

    So far we've all been reading what we like for free on the internet, what will your pay service do better? can you demonstrate you're giving me, the reader better value over "free!"? -if you cannot answer that question you should not bother with a pay wall. If you tax at the ISP level and they transfer costs to the customers then customer will move.

    So really, what information is not easily accessible to the masses, without passes and logins? high quality research, specialist and niche information. Essentially the sort that has a very low readership and cannot fund itself on ad revenues. Someone will pay for that.
  • Paid by advertising (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 05, 2014 @06:26AM (#46160635)

    I do not run an ad blocker, and I am fairly tolerant of adverts alongside my news. I will continue reading a site even if the entire sidebar is flashing animated gifs at me.

    That is my payment.

    I do block flash content, because ads with sound step over the line, and I will stop visiting a site that loads keyword ads in the text of an article, but almost anything else I consider to be a fair condition for free access to content.

  • by artor3 ( 1344997 ) on Wednesday February 05, 2014 @06:32AM (#46160653)

    The submitter may not think its worth it, but I've been happy with my online subscription. I like the periodic long form articles going in depth on topics that I often find interesting, the opinion articles where they actually invite several people with different view points to present their own argument (without just yelling at each other), and the general news coverage which usually doesn't get too caught up in the petty cable news fodder. (The "missing white girl of the week" stories.)

    Plus I am absolutely addicted to their Numberplay feature.

    But more important than any specific site, I think its important to pay for news. Research isn't free, and if we don't pay for it, who will? Remember -- who ever pays for it gets to decide what goes in. I don't want that to be the government, nor do I want it to be some rich "benefactor" with an agenda to push. Sure, we can get stuff like the Snowden leaks for free, but we need journalists like those at the Guardian to pore over the data and find the juicy bits. I don't trust random bloggers to do so, because the signal would get lost in the noise, and most of us don't have time to do it ourselves.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 05, 2014 @07:00AM (#46160745)

    Yeah right...

  • Slashdot! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by herve_masson ( 104332 ) on Wednesday February 05, 2014 @07:40AM (#46160875)

    I would pay for a slashdot version with >80% of articles about technology :)

  • Re:50 cent (Score:5, Interesting)

    by flyneye ( 84093 ) on Wednesday February 05, 2014 @07:57AM (#46160929) Homepage

    I object to the implication that I am supposed to pay for all the bullshit and propaganda funnelled in through my senses, since I have to spend the time and memory to sort any sort of useful truth out of it, dont forget the ads. My time is worth money; far more money than any stinking newsclown I can think of. THEY SHOULD PAY ME to intake their particular brand. I want my money and I want it NOW!!!
    Until then I will kick off my shoes, air my dirty socks and comment on whatever unpleasant thing crosses my mind, searching for kindred spirits.
    Pay me, I will be more polite.

  • by ultranova ( 717540 ) on Wednesday February 05, 2014 @09:43AM (#46161583)

    You haven't paid a nickel until your willingness to tolerate the advertising seeps into your psyche in such a way that causes you to behave differently in how you participate in the economy to the advantage of those who generated the advertisement stream.

    That is incorrect. The payment you make to the site you browse is a chance to be influenced. The site thus gains an opportunity to influence you, which they sell forward to the advertizers. Whether these advertizers succeed or fail in their attempt to use their opportunity is their problem, not yours. Either way you've paid.

    Think of it as selling options. The option might end up being worth something, or it might not. But even if it ends up worthless, the seller still delivered his end of the bargain.

  • by Ash Vince ( 602485 ) * on Wednesday February 05, 2014 @10:08AM (#46161769) Journal

    Remember -- who ever pays for it gets to decide what goes in. I don't want that to be the government, nor do I want it to be some rich "benefactor" with an agenda to push. Sure, we can get stuff like the Snowden leaks for free, but we need journalists like those at the Guardian to pore over the data and find the juicy bits.

    You realize, of course, that those Guardian journalists work for the Guardian, which is funded by a trust created by a wealthy man, for the purpose of ensuring that the Guardian stayed to the editorial course he had laid out. So, it's EXACTLY a case of a publication with a "rich "benefactor" with an agenda to push."

    It would be good to mention that the rich benefactor in question has been pushing up daisies for the better part of a century and so has become a bit "hands off" :)

    Nowadays how the Guardian covers news and what agenda it pushes is largely determined by the journalists themselves and the editor.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T... [wikipedia.org]

  • Consumer reports (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Charliemopps ( 1157495 ) on Wednesday February 05, 2014 @10:17AM (#46161819)

    Not exactly "News" but the only website subscription I've ever felt it worth paying was Consumer Reports. It pays for itself many times over every time I buy an appliance. It may sound lame, but my Vacuum cleaner has lasted 10 years... our dishwasher is insanely quiet... Our LCD TV has a better picture than my brother-in-laws $5000 sony and it cost us $700. Then we get into the automotive section and the sites likely saved me tens of thousands. For $20/year it's well worth it.

  • by ubuwalker31 ( 1009137 ) on Wednesday February 05, 2014 @11:24AM (#46162443)

    Librarian here. Why pay for access when your public library is already paying for the good stuff? Knowledge will always be free at your local public library. Most US libraries have access to paywalled news and scientific articles through Academic Search Premier, Gale and other databases. Our county library system offers free access to Zinio's magazine service, which is pretty sweet. Local (community) colleges usually have reference services available for county residents, and are often willing to mail you a journal article. Using these services take some effort (writing an e-mail or using your library card) so they aren't ideal for instantaneous gratification. Check out http://www.publiclibraries.com... [publiclibraries.com] to find your local library.

    As far as where to get your news, start with an RSS reader (Feedly, Netvibes, gReader) and get the rss feeds for:

    The twitter feed of your local newspapers
    Google News
    Your favorite TV news station (CNN, Al Jazeera, MSNBC, etc)
    memeorandum for politics
    A few international broadcasters of countries that you are interested in (VOA, BBC, RFI, RFERL, etc)

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...