←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: 0s | 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 #
nlawalker ◴[25 Jun 25 03:20 UTC] No.44373377[source]▶
I’d even pay a respectable amount more than that, but it needs to take like 3 seconds tops with no typing. Heck, the faster it is, the more likely I’d be to impulse buy more content from the same place.

I’d be fine with some up front work to create an account and associate a payment method or something, but not on each individual site. PayPal pretty much fits the bill for me for most transactions, where is PayPal for microtransactions?

replies(5): >>44373395 #>>44373410 #>>44373516 #>>44373549 #>>44374418 #
greyface- ◴[25 Jun 25 03:30 UTC] No.44373410[source]▶
In addition to being frictionless, it needs to be anonymous - if the publisher ends up receiving my full name, email address, phone number, and/or postal address, then I'll continue to choose piracy.
replies(1): >>44373696 #
salawat ◴[25 Jun 25 04:47 UTC] No.44373696[source]▶
Congratulations. You've proposed something dead on arrival in our current regulatory regime. You can't have financial transfers like that. Only criminals want/need that. What are you, some sort of money launderer?

No electronic funds transfer without that transparency of origin, says the man in Washington.

replies(4): >>44373717 #>>44373826 #>>44374464 #>>44374688 #
greyface- ◴[25 Jun 25 04:51 UTC] No.44373717[source]▶
That's why we have to destroy the present politico-economic system.
replies(2): >>44374766 #>>44375301 #
robocat ◴[25 Jun 25 09:33 UTC] No.44375301[source]▶
The present system seems perfectly capable of destroying itself without our help.
replies(1): >>44382923 #
greyface- ◴[25 Jun 25 23:54 UTC] No.44382923{3}[source]▶
I was (somewhat obliquely) quoting Arthur C. Clarke from 1969. It's been 56 years, and in that time the present system has yet to come close to destroying itself.
replies(1): >>44383030 #
1. robocat ◴[26 Jun 25 00:13 UTC] No.44383030{4}[source]▶
You can not say it hasn't come close yet: that is not measurable. How many brinks have there been in the last 56 years, is surely undefinable because we don't know the effects of quantum butterflies in the counterfactual timeline.

We might be able to say it hasn't destroyed itself yet?

And what is meant by the "present system" is unclear. Plus the present system cannot be the past system so your choice of words is kinda weird!

Sorry, pedantic nitpicking can be a hobby. I don't like this comment.