Off topic, but how shady is the Financial Times subscription pricing, lmao? It's $40 a month, unless you signed up for the $1 four week trial and forgot to cancel. Then it's $68 a month. 😎
Off topic, but how shady is the Financial Times subscription pricing, lmao? It's $40 a month, unless you signed up for the $1 four week trial and forgot to cancel. Then it's $68 a month. 😎
Newspapers can be pretty nasty about their pricing, and they try very hard to keep you locked in by making cancellation as difficult as possible: the NYT requires you to call to cancel your...
Newspapers can be pretty nasty about their pricing, and they try very hard to keep you locked in by making cancellation as difficult as possible: the NYT requires you to call to cancel your subscription, unless of course, you're in California, because that's illegal there.
Subscription based news removes a lot of the incentives to editorialize in an effort to drive clicks and engagement. I honestly think we would be better off if more things were subscription based.
Subscription based news removes a lot of the incentives to editorialize in an effort to drive clicks and engagement. I honestly think we would be better off if more things were subscription based.
Subscription news is fine. I am not complaining about subscriptions. You can be non-profit and primarily fund-raise through a subscription model. The problem is when the subscriptions are viewed...
Subscription news is fine. I am not complaining about subscriptions. You can be non-profit and primarily fund-raise through a subscription model. The problem is when the subscriptions are viewed as a way to turn a profit instead of as a way to sustain the operations of the news service.
I didn't complain about subscriptions. You can have subscriptions and be non-profit... But a non-profit news source would not have any incentive to literally scam the forgetful with predatory...
I didn't complain about subscriptions. You can have subscriptions and be non-profit... But a non-profit news source would not have any incentive to literally scam the forgetful with predatory pricing schemes.
Also, I already get most of my news from non-profit sources already, like NPR, PBS, and the BBC, many of which I am already happy to pay for :)
I'm curious how this'll work on an international scale. I know China has many foreign-facing nationalized companies an recognize a few with this list, but what happens when it's basically Chinese...
I'm curious how this'll work on an international scale. I know China has many foreign-facing nationalized companies an recognize a few with this list, but what happens when it's basically Chinese foreign-facing Amazon?
I'm also curious/concerned about Jack Ma, it would be like Jeff Bezos just disappearing one day.
China punishes anyone who criticizes them regardless of their social class, a true socialist paradise /s Kinda noise, but I've wondered for a while if there was a chance of Chinese corporations...
China punishes anyone who criticizes them regardless of their social class, a true socialist paradise /s
Kinda noise, but I've wondered for a while if there was a chance of Chinese corporations becoming more powerful than the government and forcing the CCP to privatize everything, turning China into a more authoritarian South Korea or US. Now I know.
This of course, conveniently comes after Jack Ma has been missing since October 24.
Really crazy there is no news about his whereabouts.
Off topic, but how shady is the Financial Times subscription pricing, lmao? It's $40 a month, unless you signed up for the $1 four week trial and forgot to cancel. Then it's $68 a month. 😎
Newspapers can be pretty nasty about their pricing, and they try very hard to keep you locked in by making cancellation as difficult as possible: the NYT requires you to call to cancel your subscription, unless of course, you're in California, because that's illegal there.
Oh hey look, Financial Times pops up in this Twitter thread, too!
I long for the death of for-profit news.
Subscription based news removes a lot of the incentives to editorialize in an effort to drive clicks and engagement. I honestly think we would be better off if more things were subscription based.
Subscription news is fine. I am not complaining about subscriptions. You can be non-profit and primarily fund-raise through a subscription model. The problem is when the subscriptions are viewed as a way to turn a profit instead of as a way to sustain the operations of the news service.
You are aware that, realistically, the alternative to subscriptions is not non-profit news but for ads/clicks news. Which is way worse.
I didn't complain about subscriptions. You can have subscriptions and be non-profit... But a non-profit news source would not have any incentive to literally scam the forgetful with predatory pricing schemes.
Also, I already get most of my news from non-profit sources already, like NPR, PBS, and the BBC, many of which I am already happy to pay for :)
Yeah. The monopoly was fine as long as the head of the organization toed the line, but once he voiced criticism, suddenly it's an issue.
I'm curious how this'll work on an international scale. I know China has many foreign-facing nationalized companies an recognize a few with this list, but what happens when it's basically Chinese foreign-facing Amazon?
I'm also curious/concerned about Jack Ma, it would be like Jeff Bezos just disappearing one day.
China punishes anyone who criticizes them regardless of their social class, a true socialist paradise /s
Kinda noise, but I've wondered for a while if there was a chance of Chinese corporations becoming more powerful than the government and forcing the CCP to privatize everything, turning China into a more authoritarian South Korea or US. Now I know.