←back to thread

Few Americans pay for news when they encounter paywalls

(www.pewresearch.org)
157 points mooreds | 1 comments | 25 Jun 25 02:46 UTC | HN request time: 0.236s | source
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 #
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 #
1. 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.