←back to thread

Few Americans pay for news when they encounter paywalls

(www.pewresearch.org)
157 points mooreds | 7 comments | 25 Jun 25 02:46 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
donatj ◴[25 Jun 25 03:15 UTC] No.44373354[source]▶
I was pondering this earlier today while manually prepending archive.is to a pay walled link on my Android phone for the umpteenth time today.

The micro-transaction proposals everyone cried about in the early 2000's would have been so much better than this.

The odds of me paying for a subscription for some tiny local newspaper on the other side of the country are literally nil, but I'd be far more willing toss you a penny or two to read the content of a single article.

replies(22): >>44373377 #>>44373411 #>>44373449 #>>44373489 #>>44373594 #>>44373636 #>>44374265 #>>44374282 #>>44374689 #>>44374692 #>>44374902 #>>44375133 #>>44375268 #>>44375289 #>>44375313 #>>44375470 #>>44375539 #>>44375540 #>>44375709 #>>44375759 #>>44376265 #>>44376876 #
1. Spivak ◴[25 Jun 25 03:30 UTC] No.44373411[source]▶
Are you sure you want an incentive structure that directly financially rewards rage bait?

At least with ads they want to keep you on the page longer.

replies(3): >>44373438 #>>44373439 #>>44373701 #
2. Simulacra ◴[25 Jun 25 03:37 UTC] No.44373438[source]▶
fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. If the article from a publication turns out to be junk, I'm never paying for it again. I'll gravitate towards sources I prefer. It would actually be a boon for the major newspapers.
3. hereme888 ◴[25 Jun 25 03:38 UTC] No.44373439[source]▶
Good point. And others will tip to confirm their bias. Still others will tip based on quality. However overall it would be an increase of "free market", and what people ask for with their $, people will get more of. Still much better than not knowing if half the news you read are part of a coordinated political agenda.
replies(2): >>44373506 #>>44373716 #
4. MarkusQ ◴[25 Jun 25 03:55 UTC] No.44373506[source]▶
If that's what's bothering you, I can put your mind at ease by pointing out the absurdity of our world today. Half the news you read is, in fact, part of a coordinated political agenda.

Once you've absorbed that and come to terms with it emotionally, you're ready for the punchline: so's the other half.

replies(1): >>44378871 #
5. usefulcat ◴[25 Jun 25 04:49 UTC] No.44373701[source]▶
> Are you sure you want an incentive structure that directly financially rewards rage bait?

We already have exactly that, via ads. This proposal may or may not be better, but it's far from clear that it's any worse..

> At least with ads they want to keep you on the page longer.

By tempting you with more rage bait? Again, not seeing a significant difference either way.

6. usefulcat ◴[25 Jun 25 04:51 UTC] No.44373716[source]▶
> Still much better than not knowing if half the news you read are part of a coordinated political agenda.

I don't see how micro transactions would address that issue in any meaningful way.

7. hereme888 ◴[25 Jun 25 16:08 UTC] No.44378871{3}[source]▶
Sure both sides can have either an agenda or incorrect facts. But micro-payments should incentivize a high quality product.

For example I typically don't read or watch MSM. But with the recent Middle East conflict the most up-to-date information is through mainstream channels.