this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
61 points (95.5% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35884 readers
3477 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 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Izzgo@kbin.social 23 points 1 year ago (1 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 8 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.

[–] schaeferpp@discuss.tchncs.de 11 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 10 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 8 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.

[–] Carter@feddit.uk 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 year ago

notices the .uk on your username

[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 4 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.

[–] 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.

[–] davetapley@lemmy.world 2 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

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

What, something that keeps removing features?