I like to pay for what I use because I like what I use. I know that by paying for it I help its existence and therefore my enjoyment of said service is more likely to continue. That's why I contribute here and for news services I consume.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The New York Times Ends Apple News Partnership and Pulls All Articles
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I like to pay for what I use because I like what I use. I know that by paying for it I help its existence and therefore my enjoyment of said service is more likely to continue. That's why I contribute here and for news services I consume.
I don’t know if it’s still going but I got a NYT promo deal about a month ago for a $1/week online subscription for 52 weeks.
Good riddance. Less junk on my phone is better.
May just be easier to uninstall Apple News?
...and two.
At least, for me. First, Sky&Telescope: gone. Bummer.
Now, New York Times.
Who's gonna be the next?
Apple, you better hurry up to fix Apple News+, otherwise the next who will leave will be the few subscribers still active.
At least, for me. First, Sky&Telescope: gone. Bummer.
Now, New York Times.
Who's gonna be the next?
Apple, you better hurry up to fix Apple News+, otherwise the next who will leave will be the few subscribers still active.
Of course they do. And they want the more direct data they get as well.
I said there is a fundamental conflict of interest here. NYT don’t want to be like the utility company where every provider is interchangeable, and Apple holds the keys to everything.
Probably liked their views though so they could pump up their numbers for advertising sales.
this is not wholly surprising. the nytimes is one of the few journalism sources that successfully pivoted to digital and has made money from it. their numbers have been excellent and conversion to paid subscription solid, and they’ve never had anything but the occasional free article in apple news. beyond that, apple wouldnt offer them control of advertiser data which helps them generate targeted ad revenue (a win for consumers by apple imho) so it makes sense that they’re out. Most publications cannot survive on their own and are more likely to be dependent on apple’s terms.
also for those surprised that people pay for journalism...why should quality writing be free? It never was prior to the Internet and good writers come with a fee. a person with a Twitter account and an opinion does not a journalist make.
also for those surprised that people pay for journalism...why should quality writing be free? It never was prior to the Internet and good writers come with a fee. a person with a Twitter account and an opinion does not a journalist make.
Good for the NYTs. At least Apple has Fox News The Wall Street Journal.
I use Apple news, as do a number of my friends with iPhones.
Your comment about curation confuses me because that’s entirely possible within Apple news. My feed shows articles from many different sources across the political spectrum because that’s what I’ve asked it to show.
I get a lot of value with AN+ -- with full access to LA Times, SF Chronicle (a relatively new addition), WSJ, The Times (of London), New Yorker, etc. All of which normally are behind paywalls. I am also able to do a $5 per month add-on for The Washington Post. It's a pity that the NYT could work out a deal where AN+ readers could pay $5 or something for some sort of reduced subscription in terms of content. I'm happy to pay for news. But I prefer it all in one place.
NYT hasn't had "quality journalism" since before 2008. No one's loss here
Funny because I am in the News app all the time but don't read many magazines these days. Every time I think about cancelling my News + subscription I find myself reading a mag or article I wouldn't be able to with out it.
NYT certainly carried a leftist brand of news... for my part, it's no big loss.
Further, one thing that Apple has done along is support the privacy of the user... in the case of Pay, the vendor doesn't get customer info... why would NYT expect anything different from their "news" service?
Finally, isn't it the function of the news aggregator (Apple News in this case) to provide the content without forcing the customer to go behind a paid firewall for the story?
Not sure what the NYT was expecting.
Further, one thing that Apple has done along is support the privacy of the user... in the case of Pay, the vendor doesn't get customer info... why would NYT expect anything different from their "news" service?
Finally, isn't it the function of the news aggregator (Apple News in this case) to provide the content without forcing the customer to go behind a paid firewall for the story?
Not sure what the NYT was expecting.
Those of us who remember what quality journalism looked like anyway. Agreed. Magazines, for me anyway, have taken a massive dive in quality now that they're 80%+ advertisements and giving out subscriptions for basically free. I grew up watching the news late on TV before Star Trek, reading newspapers and a few select magazines.
Well said. Same here. For the cost, having everything in one place is great.
GOOD. !!!
Don't let the Door hit you in the Assssss on the way out !!!!!!!!!
Don't let the Door hit you in the Assssss on the way out !!!!!!!!!
There is way way way too much free news out there. Even paid articles will have someone giving a summary or their take for free. Or many other news sites are going to cover the same stories. Hard to see how in the long term any of the print media survives. More and more independent journalists are going to fill the gaps with ad supported news blogs/podcasts and augmented by user supported tips and subs.
Keep the laughs coming, homie!
probably cause no one believes what they have to "report" on anymore.
Why? Journalism not dependant on advertising or government funding is surely a good thing?
And just like that, Apple news readers instantly get a little less misinformed.
Yeah a free press should be free -- its in the name! /sarcasm.
If you haven't seen why an independent free press is worthy of compensation in the last four years I don't know what to tell you. While I don't think the current system is perfect, and it favors big players vs small local journalism, which is crucial to local democracy, the hard working reporters, designers and photographers are deserving of compensation for their efforts.