2y ago

Ironic

34 comments

The internet is almost unrecognizable from what it was 20 years ago.
- Profits run everything, and while I understand that, it does lend itself to a shitty experience for the user unless you pay for it.
  
  To me it seems like the 2000s and 2010s when all those companies got massive and laid off middle management. Then those short sighted assholes got jobs elsewhere and poisoned those ponds.
- Almost unrecognizable from just three years ago.

Lol. To be fair though Reuters business isn’t views it’s selling articles to other press.
- Don't bring logic here, this is reddit! Wait. Oh no. Seriously though, not all sites with pay walls are applying the pay wall to every article. Some charge for opinions and business gossip while leaving true news that affects everyone open

Reuters is different right? I mean, they're actually producing content, not just taking user-created content and claiming that it's theirs.
- They're definitely different, just found it ironic.

Ever notice how right-wing news is free but actual news you have to pay for.
- Because making up stories is much easier than actual journalism.
  
  Lmao, it’s so funny! We pay for made up things in the entertainment industry, but also pay for the truth in media. Ah, capitalism.

You have reached your daily limit for Lemmy comments. To read more, please upgrade to a Lemmium Subscription to triple your allotted daily limit.
- Lemmy can't handle triple my daily limit.
  
  Lemmy can't handle half my daily limit.

All the actual journalism getting paywalled probably isn't great for social/political discourse and our general grip on reality.
- It sucks because journalists do need to make money to continue reporting. Spamming sites with ads is bad for the reader's experience too. Not totally sure what the solution is.
- It's kind of ridiculous how quickly actual access to news and an informed world view, which WAS supposed to be one of the Internet's great advantages, has become a dream unless you pony up to the whimsies of every fucking publication board craving fat profits.
  
  Yeah, plus it's not even like having to buy newspapers in the pre-internet days, it's all recurring subscriptions that are a pain to cancel. Truly a great shame.

I wish there was a way to have responsible news sponsorship without having this annoying ass article limit system or web 3.0 crypto nonsense.
(I nearly flinched when writing that last sentence because I still have PTSD from Twitter summoning the Hordes if you so much as mention that c-word.)

Has anyone tried WebApps? I did and it didn't limit me when I passed my limit of 600

I always put the URL into the Wayback Machine on archive.org in these situations. 9 times out of 10 there's an archived version of the article with no paywall.
- Yes. That or use Google Cache. They almost never show a paywall to the Google bot because that would hurt their page rank.

lpt- reuters only uses a soft paywall, you can bypass it pretty easily by opening articles in an incognito/private window

34 comments