
Newspaper subscription experiment - OMGWTF
http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/newspaper-subscription-experiment
======
jakewins
I replaced my fairly curated (/r/neutralpolitics, /r/neutralnews etc) Reddit
morning news with NYT about a month ago. It's completely changed my morning
routine. I feel much more "holistically" informed, and I feel calmer since the
news are significantly more nuanced than what makes it to the top of organic
news sites.

The "morning briefing", which gives me a brief summary of key news items to go
with my morning coffee, alone would have been worth the $3.75 a week.

Had none of the issues OP notes on getting an annual subscription - and at the
NYT price point, I'm ashamed it took me this long to pay for good journalism.

Independent of what rag you support, if you don't currently pay for
journalistic work, please consider doing so. The dollar figures are minimal
and constitute a tremendous boost for the Fourth Estate.

[https://www.nytimes.com/subscriptions/Multiproduct/lp8U939.h...](https://www.nytimes.com/subscriptions/Multiproduct/lp8U939.html?campaignId=6KQ4R&gclid=CIuEt_21kNICFQaVfgodz2oNQw)

~~~
problems
This seems like a good idea, but I'd really like something a little less
slanted than NYT. Any good options?

~~~
Someone1234
The BBC? No subscription either (ad supported outside of the UK). I'd also
throw in Al Jazeera which has a slight slant but that slight slant counteracts
the BBC's slight slant giving you a very balanced overview.

AP and Reuters themselves are good too (even if you're typically used to
reading about them as a source rather than a direct publication).

PBS and CSpan are good but underfunded. Other US news is too biased and full
of pro-US propaganda which gets tiresome in a hurry. Plus if I wanted to read
unverified "anonymous's sources" or "report: <some other publication>" I'd
just read Reddit comments or Tweets. Unfortunately that's largely what US
"news" is these days, unverified facts and others repeating those facts until
they're true.

~~~
marcusjt
Alas the BBC's bias towards supporting the government's position on various
issues (thanks in no small part to staffing the upper echelons of the
organisation with Tory party members) has become increasingly pronounced in
recent years to the extent that I simply can't trust BBC coverage of important
issues anymore.

------
problems
> You have to sit through an online chat session which takes longer than it
> should. Apparently you’re not allowed to cancel your subscription until you
> answer the question, how is your day going?

This right here is why PayPal won online payments. They're extremely consumer
friendly. One button cancellation, no fucking around. I don't even bother
going to sites any more, I just open PayPal and hit cancel.

I basically won't work with anything that's not PayPal or Bitcoin these days
due to hassles like this.

Out of curiosity, does anyone have any experience getting their credit card
company to cancel all future payments to a company? Is this easy to do?

~~~
tghw
Final will do it. They allow you to create a card for each payee, which you
can cancel at any time.

[https://www.getfinal.com/](https://www.getfinal.com/)

(I have a card, but am not otherwise affiliated with them.)

~~~
Someone1234
Great service, but be careful simply cancelling payment and assuming the
problem will solve itself. That's how people wind up being sent to collections
with huge fees tacked on.

For example, people regularly cancel cards or move and assume "the gym will
figure it out" only to discover two years later that that $20/month bill is
now a $600+ bill and they're being hounded by a collections agency.

Credit scores make this even more risky (if you care about such things).

~~~
danpalmer
Agreed. Just cancelling your payment is the same as _not paying_ as far as the
company is concerned. You have to notify them that you wish to cancel your
account otherwise they literally can't tell the difference.

~~~
problems
I've done this hundreds of times via PayPal and never had an issue. Maybe CCs
come with different expectations or Internet companies just understand what
not paying anymore means, but no issues so far.

~~~
danpalmer
The difference with PayPal is that they manage the subscription, and you're
saying "stop my subscription", credit/debit cards have no concept of a
subscription, so when you stop paying someone with one there is no
communication of that to the seller.

Example: if you stop your gym membership with PayPal, the gym's membership
system will either be notified that your membership has been cancelled, or
they will do some periodic check to see who has an active membership and
update from that.

If you stop your payments going through on a credit/debit card, it's
essentially the same as having no money in your account, or your card being
stopped because it's stolen. There's no communication back down the channel,
you just can't bill it. As a result your membership starts to go into the red,
which is usually allowed for a period because of payment issues. When they
contact you with a bill months later they have every right to claim that money
because you never ended the membership and could have been using the gym
during that time. It is usually only through wanting good customer
satisfaction that they might waive the fees for that period.

------
the_gastropod
It is bizarre that we don't have any consumer protection law around requiring
an option for online cancellation for subscriptions that offer online
purchases.

edit: spelling ;-)

~~~
crooked-v
I agree with the sentiment, but I think you meant to use "bizarre".

~~~
the_gastropod
Hah! Thanks

------
hackuser
Ted and jakewins both advocate subscribing to support newspapers and
journalism.

I absolutely agree that quality journalism is essential and should be paid
for. But aim higher: In addition to subscribing, try to find a funding method
that actually will work in the long run. Specifications, in no order:

A) Journalists have sufficient funds to do quality work, earn a decent living,
and attract talented, dedicated people to the profession.

B) Journalists can speak truth to power and to an angry Internet mob. They are
free from influence by their funders, to a great degree.

C) The quality work is as widely distributed as possible. This is essential:
If only subscribers can read it, then only tiny portion of the online world
can benefit and it's not part of the public conversation. Instead of the
Internet dream (very achievable) of distributing valuable content
effortlessly, we're back to the old days of it being available only to a few
subscribers and everyone else subsists on 'fake news'.

It's a question that's been asked many times, but so far nobody has solved it
(and specification C is usually ignored).

~~~
grkvlt
I believe this is essentially what The Guardian is set up to do, being owned
by the Scott Trust [1][2] rather than normal shareholders. Assuming you agree
with their politics, it is possible to support them by becoming a member [3]
with a monthly subscription of GBP 5.00

> The Scott Trust was originally created in 1936 to secure the financial and
> editorial independence of the Guardian in perpetuity and to safeguard the
> journalistic freedom and liberal values of the Guardian free from commercial
> or political interference.

1\. [https://www.theguardian.com/the-scott-
trust](https://www.theguardian.com/the-scott-trust)

2\. [https://www.theguardian.com/membership/2016/oct/24/scott-
tru...](https://www.theguardian.com/membership/2016/oct/24/scott-trust-
guardian-owner-journalism-newspaper)

3\.
[https://membership.theguardian.com/uk/supporter](https://membership.theguardian.com/uk/supporter)

------
gukov
Subscribing to mega newspapers to save journalism and democracy is like buying
Coca-Cola daily to save farmers.

~~~
brickmort
It didn't occur to the author that social media is the new journalism.

~~~
jdietrich
"You do not, in my city, run into bloggers or so-called citizen journalists at
city hall, or in the courthouse hallways, or in the bars where police officers
gather. You don't see them consistently nurturing and then pressing sources.
You don't see them holding institutions accountable on a daily basis.

Why? Because high-end journalism is a profession. It requires daily full-time
commitment by trained men and women who return to the same beats day in and
day out. Reporting was the hardest and in some ways most gratifying job I ever
had.

I am offended to think that anyone, anywhere believes that American monoliths
as insulated, self-preserving and self-justifying as police departments,
school systems, legislatures and chief executives can be held to gathered
facts by amateurs, pursuing the task without compensation, training, or for
that matter, sufficient training to make public officials even care who it is
they're lying to or who they're withholding information from.

Indeed, the very phrase 'citizen journalist' strikes my ear as Orwellian. A
neighbour who is a good listener and cares about people is a good neighbour.
He is not, in any sense, a 'citizen social worker'. Just as the neighbour with
a garden hose and good intentions is not a 'citizen firefighter'. To say so is
a heedless insult to trained social workers and firefighters."

\- David Simon

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Llnbzq7b4Ww](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Llnbzq7b4Ww)

~~~
DrScump

      "You do not, in my city, run into bloggers or so-called  citizen journalists at city hall,
      or in the courthouse hallways, or in the bars where police officers gather..."
    

But this is 2017, and most cities are one-newspaper towns, generally
exhibiting close, mutually-protective relationships between commercial media
and government decision-makers. I've seen major papers _outright lie_ about
events in city council meetings and legislation (for two examples) when they
thought nobody would hold them accountable. I've seen written accounts of
speakers and audiences at city council meetings that _the reporter didn 't
even attend_. (And if you search online, you may well find independent
reporting "gadfly" groups or individuals you didn't know existed -- the local
commercial media sure wouldn't tell you. _Nextdoor_ can also be useful, but
the signal-to-noise ratio is often low.)

One example process: local governments dish out taxpayer money to pseudo-
independent "service organizations". Those organizations use part of these
funds to buy advertising in local media and on public transit agencies. Those
media, in turn, do flowery reporting on those local governments and soft-pedal
police violence and union corruption, resulting in situations like "The
Riders" in the Oakland Police Department[0]. This is too often the circle of
modern urban "journalism". And that's without even addressing the issue of
predatory corporate behavior by publishers themselves[1].

The broader point: modern, for-profit media are exactly that -- for-profit
businesses. Their fiduciary duty is to maximize shareholder value. Objectivity
and honesty are orthogonal to short- and medium-term profit.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_v._City_of_Oakland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_v._City_of_Oakland)

[1] [http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/05.29.97/spanish-
pre...](http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/05.29.97/spanish-
press-9722.html)

~~~
throwanem
His town is my town, too. The city council does what it damn well pleases,
most of the time, but what check there is on the corruption that pervades our
local government comes mostly from the Sun.

On the other hand, despite his cogent comments on the value of professional
reporting, he now occupies himself as a television writer and producer. Make
of that what you will.

~~~
Chris2048
By 'he', do you mean DrScump?

~~~
throwanem
No, I mean David Simon.

------
roystonvassey
I loved the content in the Journal but unfortunately I was put off by their
sneaky behaviour when they charged my card for the next month's subscription
after the free month. Granted I should've set an alert but, they could've at
least informed me once before it expired.

To then cancel it, I had to make a call and stay on it for half hour. I still
can't figure out who's coming with these hackneyed marketing "solutions" at
media houses.

~~~
problems
Unfortunately this is an extremely common practice. Usually what I do to avoid
such things is to immediately cancel once they give me the free one as with
most services you'll get to keep your subscription to the end of the month
anyways.

------
gigatexal
Best line: "First, I’ll note that I have a pretty much unlimited media budget.
If I can afford to spend a hundred dollars per month poisoning myself with
tequila, I can spend that much on information."

~~~
mturmon
Yes. Stated humorously, but presumably meant seriously.

I've concluded the same about informational media such as books, magazines,
music. If I'm paying attention to it and getting value, it's generally worth
paying for and not agonizing about the price.

~~~
gigatexal
In all seriousness kudos to you for subscribing to physical news papers -- I
find it highly cathartic to sit down and read a newspaper. I think it reminds
me of my dad and granddad reading the paper, so brings back good times. That
and you get info without all the radiation of a monitor.

~~~
mturmon
Dead tree magazines, yes...newspapers, no. For me, anyway.

------
pdog
_> Zero newspapers allow you to change subscription term online. It’s 2017 and
newspapers haven’t figured out web forms with radio buttons._

Newspapers all have digital departments, yet you can only cancel your
subscription by calling a phone number...

~~~
chinathrow
That is, of course, by design. So the reference to "2017" or "digital
departments" is moot - they want to make cancellation as cumbersome as
possible.

From a european view, I think this should be regulated: enable the same
channel used for easy subscription also for easy cancellation.

~~~
Semaphor
We had some lawsuits about that in Germany (having to be able to cancel the
same way you subscribed) where common sense won. Not sure how far
implementation has gone though.

------
verelo
With all the talk of these businesses struggling, and their supposed focus on
moving into the future, I would be a pretty upset shareholder to find out that
they have the user experience this...wrong?!

Although honestly, not shocked by anything here.

~~~
Someone1234
You assume this isn't all on purpose as part of their "retention strategy."
Pretty sure this is now taught in MBA farms to the latest batch of grads as
everyone does it...

Nobody measures the lost repeat business due to these retention strategies
because most people don't look beyond the current fiscal year.

~~~
verelo
Another likely reality here is that there are A/B/C tests running, and this
person just fell into a cohort where 12 month options were unavailable by
chance.

Either way, i'm just a pessimist, going digital isn't easy for any legacy
company and it's clear they're all struggling.

------
Yhippa
The first thing I do whenever I subscribe to a service these days is research
how difficult it is to unsubscribe from it. I was tempted to get Sunday
delivery for some of those newspapers in the article but realized that it
would be tough to get out of them.

I think this type of interaction might make sense for a different type of
customer. I imagine people who are getting the physical version of a newspaper
might be older or less tech-savvy so the "bad old way" of waiting in a call
center queue on hold might be what they are expecting instead of a fancy
complicated web interface.

------
pettazz
Okay, this is a good look into the payment systems of all three, but I feel
like judging them solely by that and not by the content of the actual paper is
probably not the right metric to use here.

~~~
VLM
Yet, its strangely fair, in that regardless of the content of the Times,
billing in that industry is so bad, and billing at the Times is so unusually
awful within industry standards, that he couldn't give them money to
subscribe.

By analogy I trade money for code, and I won't sell code to you (nothing
personal, just can't), so you can wonder how good my code is, but it doesn't
really matter because I won't sell you my code regardless of its quality
level.

------
davidw
Financial Times is good too; similar PoV as the WSJ, but 100% less Murdoch
control.

~~~
hbosch
How is the US coverage from the FT? The best parts about the WSJ (and NYT) is
the timely breaking news, the live-video and live-audio feeds of various
proceedings (E.g. both had a live broadcast of the cabinet confirmations,
along with real-time input from on-hand journalists, giving generally good
insight).

I actually vastly prefer the FT website to NYT/WP/WSJ, but would very much
appreciate the prompt US-centric news feeds. I know it's Euro-centric and
Britain-based, so I wanted to ask.

~~~
davidw
I'm not sure it's a "breaking news" type of outfit compared to others, but
they tend to be fairly thorough and there is a US section.

I actually do like a bit more Europe/World coverage.

I don't subscribe to FT, though - I barely finish The Economist each week.

------
pythonaut_16
10/10 post. It was interesting, short, and to the point and matched precisely
to the title (i.e. no clickbait)

~~~
smhenderson
I find most of Ted's posts to be exactly that. He doesn't post daily but
frequently enough that's it worth visiting regularly.

That and all the great updates on OpenBSD development!

------
baccredited
This guy's approach reminds me of why I ended up with Dish instead of DirecTV.
Dish was the one that lets me DOWNGRADE my service without forcing me to pick
up the phone. Cancel HBO? Just click!

~~~
mgkimsal
odd... we had directv, and the last year, we'd downgraded to the most basic
service. we'd 'upgrade' for 3 hours to watch a sports game 2x per month - were
prorated for those days - and would 'downgrade' right after the game. So...
basic service for 28 days, prorated 'higher package' price for 3 days. worked
fine all done from their website. Usually needed to do it at least 5 minutes
before the game.

------
yniels
Did you try blendle.com? They launched a beta product in the US and with 1
account you can read multiple US newspapers.

But already have there product wide available in Netherlands and Germany

~~~
a3n
Apparently I have to give them my email before they'll tell me how much it
costs, or give me enough information to estimate my particular cost.

~~~
antisthenes
If memory serves, you get $5 free when you sign up, and after that you pay per
article, which ranges from 30 to 80 cents.

It's worth checking out if you have a separate email for things like that.

------
Spooky23
He's lucky he didn't try to subscribe to a local Hearst paper.

I subscribed because I like the paper and the newsstand in my building closed.
But the process is bizarre -- They only let you subscribe in weird increments
of weeks vs. months. Then you get what they call "bonus" weeks, but the
outcome is that the billing system ends up double-billing you for up to one
week, and you can't predict when the bills will come.

~~~
DrScump
For insight into modern Hearst ethics, read up on their acquisition of the
_San Francisco Chronicle_.

------
rc_bhg
His logic makes sense to me.

