Conversation

Ever since I got annoyed enough by the NYT to unsubscribe and even stop visiting for the free articles, I’ve been mostly cobbling together a news feed from CNN, LA times (subscriber for local stuff but it’s very limited) and occasional free raids of FT and BBC.
17
62
I check Fox News occasionally in an opposition research spirit. WSJ they say has good reporting, but the mix of economy focus and editorial bias makes it rare for me. Guardian occasionally but mainly because it’s free. It feels like a more inept version of the NYT.
1
30
Hindustan Times for India news. Long tail of drive-by reads from topically relevant outlets. Not counting a few substacks, the LA times is the only thing I subscribe to. Nothing feels worthwhile. But for now you can still cobble together a sense of the news this way.
2
22
I suspect most of you are in this boat. This us really begging to be an aggregator token-based subscription model. I’d gladly pay for say 100 reads a month across a sufficiently broad portfolio without major holes.
7
70
No, this is far too simplistic. It’s not “just a database.” Reporting still takes effort, risk, and money. People who do it need to get paid. It needs to get by small local orgs not global behemoths. Even if you condone a bit of marginal pirate-aggregation, it’s not a solution.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @vgr
We can just set one up. Really its a data base. The issue is folk keep trying to own parts of it. Aaron Swartz had the correct idea - knowledge turns nearly 9 billion humans into evolution machines. I think that's the problem leaders like us dumb ❤
7
32
Replying to
Good reporting takes teams, teams are managed by companies, companies produce product, product is not good reporting. I think you underestimate the potential of solo journalists but team formation outside of corporate environments happens spontaneously if the resources are there.