• Sam 🍄
      link
      fedilink
      926 days ago

      @misk @yesman also you get three options: pay for news, get predatory ads and unreadable websites, or state funded media

      Scummy fourth option is Adblock

      • body_by_make
        link
        fedilink
        526 days ago

        The side effect of the fourth option is your news outlet dies because it can’t get any money

    • Baldur Nil
      link
      fedilink
      223 days ago

      What I’ve noticed that happened in Brazil is that most major news channels have 2 websites: a subscription one with quality articles and a free one with very summarized AI lazily written news with no details or context.

      There’s really not much to it, quality content needs money and ads don’t pay off for all of it (besides the fact nowadays people just blocks them).

    • @acosmichippo
      link
      English
      0
      edit-2
      26 days ago

      npr and associated press are free and not for profit.

      • @[email protected]OP
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        26 days ago

        Fair point, I don’t envy much about America but NPR is a gem. There’s much more included in News+ though.

      • arquebus_x
        link
        fedilink
        426 days ago

        NPR is not free; it’s paid for by taxes, which means that every U.S. citizen is in fact paying for news whether they like it or not. And “not for profit” is not the same as “no cost to the consumer.” In addition, most of the outlets for NPR are local public radio stations that are - you guessed it - funded by taxes (as well as fund drives).

        • @acosmichippo
          link
          English
          326 days ago

          obviously nothing is literally “free”, that’s a trivial point to make. operational funds have to come for somewhere. The point was there’s no additional cost to the reader (that they aren’t already paying for) to get news from those sources and they don’t depend on ad revenue or data monetization to make a profit.