8

So I get ads are terrible, obviously. I run ad-blockers all the time. But people also get angry at paywalls. So that leaves me wondering, if not through ads or subscriptions, how is a news publisher supposed to sustain itself?

top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Evotech@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago
[-] danhab99@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

I'm ready to be wrong but isn't that what the associated press is for?

[-] Cevilia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago

By selling papers?

Worked for centuries.

[-] Vorticity@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

What do you think a subscription is? Or do you really think people are going to go back to buying physical papers?

[-] antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago

The news article should be free to read. After all it’s only text and it was written to be read. Ads greatly detract from the whole experience.

My proposal for a new model of news would be to be able to create an account for a one time fee of $5, which allows you to comment on articles for $0.25 per comment. Users who are logged in are also allowed to tip articles they enjoy, with proceeds going at least 50% to the author. Another option would be to hide or blur all images on articles unless the user pays $0.25. I think this model could make money, and allow customers to pay as you go and support the content they want more of. A regular subscription is a blank check for them to publish anything.

[-] leoj@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I mean isn't there a world where we have unobtrusive adverts that are for products people actually want, and can sustain the reporting?

I think people would use less ad blockers if the ads were not designed / placed in a way that feels almost seizure inducing at times.

Unfortunately I think threads/twitter might be the future as a type of open source reporting, as everytime I hit a pay wall I turn around and leave.

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

adverts that are for products people actually want

This requires metadata fingerprinting which can be used to deanonymize people. And has been used as justification for intense surveillance of users and aggregation of user data. It is also profitable to sell this data to third party data brokers which inturn sell the data collected to other private entities which might have nefarious intent.

Basically, this means that modern advertising on the internet is inherently wrong, even if it's ads that people might actually like.

[-] Bourff@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Mining crypto on visitors' machines. (/s)

[-] TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

Installing ransomware on every computer that visits the site. (/s)

[-] ramasses@social.ozymandias.club 0 points 1 month ago

DDOSS ing other news sites through malicous javascript to ensure their is no competition

/s i think...

[-] TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

It’s called a “strategic investment into maintaining competitive advantage” in corpo talk.

[-] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 0 points 1 month ago

Can you elaborate why you think that your comment requires a sarcasm tag?

I'm asking because getting the reader to contribute some CPU cycles whilst they read your content seems to be a way to balance the books, they get something from you, you get something from them.

Note that I'm not a fan of Bitcoin et. al., but the idea of making the reader's computer calculate something or process something on the authors' behalf seems, at least at first glance, a valid and potentially unobtrusive transaction.

[-] Bourff@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

First, crypto is mostly a scam. But if it's clearly said that visiting the site will use 100% of your cpu, drain the battery and make your device crawl while the fans go crazy, then sure why not. Otherwise it's a dark pattern. And I thought mining on cpus was near useless these days, but that may depend on the specific blockchain used.

[-] chunes@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

By doing good enough journalism that people want to pay for it.

Sadly, this appears to be an unreachable bar for most.

[-] Fizz@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 month ago

A percentage is funded by a local media budget as long as they maintain fair and accurate news coverage designed to inform the public. The rest can be subscriptions and ad partnerships. Like they can write an promotional piece and mark it as so and be paid for that.

[-] greenskye@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

Strong protections and regulations on what counts as 'news' and then offering subsidies paid for via taxes on Internet/cable TV/etc subscriptions to non-profit news outlets.

Of course that's near impossible and humanity would corrupt it eventually, so I don't know.

[-] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

I agree in theory, but that makes journalism too dependent on state approval. There are too many journalists throughout time who were publicly discredited and shamed for not towing the line. Publishing something of which the state does not approve is scary enough without the news orgs funding being cut as a result.

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 1 points 1 month ago

Sorry, but did you mention any of these 250+ banned words in your article? OpenAI has said you did and now we are revoking all grants and funding ever promised to your organization. You have also lost your media license and will be placed on a watchlist.

[-] InternationalHermit@lemmy.today 1 points 1 month ago

Normalize paywall.

You had to buy the newspaper to read the newspaper, so paying for a digital newspaper isn’t any different. Plus, people will pay a reasonable fee for good content.

Even the ny times has paying subscribers. This isn’t much different from Netflix. As long as the pricing is fair, and the articles don’t double dip by including ads on top of subscription, it will work just fine.

Give people a free trial to test the content.

[-] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Aside from maybe my local paper which reports on things NOBODY else cares about, there is not one source that I would want to invest in like that.

Paywalls nudge people towards choosing one or two sources for all of their information. The more sources they pay for, the less value each one provides.

Diversity of information is better for society.

[-] Dearth@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The news organizations that exist eight paywalls are things like info wars, fox and oan. People who've gravitated to those free sites have gotten us to the mess we're in now.

[-] CombatWombat@feddit.online 1 points 1 month ago

I get my access to most of my news through my local library. My library card comes with access to NYT, WaPo, and the Seattle Times, amongst others. I pay my taxes, my library pays a deal with the news site, and everyone’s happy. Seems like a good setup to me.

[-] KingOfTheCouch@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

Go back to the way things were. Static ads that aren't obnoxious and topical to the article or audience of the site might keep the few that haven't turned on adblockers from doing so. Engage users, don't insult them and get your demographics by opt-in surveys. Offer subscriptions that give benefits. Ask for donations. These things are all possible. Maybe get rid of some C suite types and keep your organization small and lean and just pay the journalists and editors (and support staff that actually create the content/keep the blinky lights on).

To hell with the megacorps and ad execs that have ruined the internet.

How did bookwriting monasteries sustain themselves in the medieval ages?

I think that newspapers should be surprisingly similar to that.

[-] Limonene@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

I dunno, but it's not like this.

I've tried supporting multiple news sites, but it's always something. Like the site just crashing before I can get to pay, or an endless captcha, or my credit card being rejected as sussy, but the credit card company claims they haven't declined anything. I've tried multiple credit cards, multiple computers, Firefox and Chromium, always the same.

The Onion is the closest thing to news I successfully paid for.

[-] Fizz@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 month ago

Ive heard all kinds of cope before but "I would pay them but they dont accept my payments" is wild. Hundreds of millions of people around the world figured out how to pay for their news but somehow you are unable to no matter what you try. My 80 year old grandma can subscribe but somehow you are completely unable to. You've gotta agree that sounds pretty suspect.

[-] BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Good question. What pisses me off is that all these websites want $9.99 monthly subscription while I want to read a single article. There's no viable micropayment system where I could pay 10 cents for one article access

[-] fdnomad@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

I wish that was possible too but if you pay by card, they gotta pay like 30 cents for each transaction

[-] Steve@communick.news -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

People need to get used to paying for things online.
If more people are willing to do it, the cheaper it can be for each of us.

If your news is free, it's trying to sell you something.

this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2026
8 points (100.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

48218 readers
137 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. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS