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.
Wall Street Journal to Join Apple's News Subscription Service, but NYT and Washington Post Not Participating
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If by welcome, you mean, welcome to what macrumors has become, than yes. I've been reading this site religiously since 2002 and it never used to be like this.
If I had a nickel for every time folks (myself included) said "_____ is gonna fail" when Apple introduced a new product or service I'd be a rich man. So I think I'll hold my fire on this one.
Remember Mac Life/Mac Addict magazine? Ahh the good old days. I was just cleaning my office at home a came across every issue on a shelf. Funny how if you read the news stories, little has changed. I cannot think of a magazine or news paper I would want to pay for today. I hope I am wrong.
It might be a trade-off certain publishers would be willing to make. Apple's ecosystem is so huge that publishers might make more money off of this than individual subscriptions.
I'm really concerned by Apple's choice and stubbornness here. Journalism is already going through a pretty difficult phase, and forcing them into this payment scheme (which they are not optimistic about) might end up decreasing journalism's quality in the long run.
It sounds like Apple will be joining in on the $$$ of “news”. They are a business, so good for them I guess. And actually I don’t know any good sources for news anymore anyways, so might I as well accept that too.
[doublepost=1553120163][/doublepost]
Lol. It’s already pretty bad, I laughed to think if it could get worse! Seriously
In order to get news, someone has to be paid somehow, and ad revenue is not working. If you value independent journalism then you're willing to pay to have it produced. This looks like a way to keep news media afloat, especially the smaller operators that can be really critical (the NYT doesn't cover stories in a small town, for one example). I think Apple is taking too big of a bite here though...25% seems more appropriate, otherwise there won't be a lot to share with the producers, even with the large number of people who will be reading articles.
Steve Jobs did ping so failure was on him. But Steve can do no fault with people on here
True. I'm subscriber to NYT & New Yorker and I thought it would be unfair to cancel the subscription if they were to be included. Plus that 50% sounds quite unacceptable.
Maybe the biggest problem is that there is no way to get independent honest unbiased news. In Canada are used to think we had it pretty good because the CBC was funded by the government and more than 20 years ago I used to think that was a good thing. But these days the government is just another interest group using the same vast technology of the Internet. I guess the Internet is part of the problem strangely. I’m just making a comment - no wisdom to preach this time.
Last edited:
These are big publications. It's not like Buzzfeed decided to be apart of this news service.
I have never consider that, but I am now. I am tired of Apple’s tactics.
Not interested without the NY Times, Washington Post and LA Times.
I think the 50% revenue split on Apple's part is pure GREED. Magazines and newspapers have been in a tough spot for several years as their revenues have consistently declined. Apple is doing nothing more than aggregating the services, the actual publishers are doing the hard work of writing the stories, taking the photos, laying out each and every issue and putting blood, sweat and tears into their publications. They deserve the lion share of the revenue. Not Apple. Good for the NYT and Washington Post for calling out Apple on it's greedy business practices.
Wow, 50% of revenues? That seems a bit steep, especially given how the App Store takes 30% and even that drops to 15% for subscriptions that go beyond one year.
Apple better be careful, they're already coming under attack for the App Store policies and this could simply give another reason for EU regulators to go after them.
[doublepost=1553122674][/doublepost]Also, I wonder about free sites? The CBC in Canada, or Slate/Vox/The Atlantic? They have free access now, but do they get some action if they also offer their articles through the Apple News service?
Would be an easy way to make more money I would assume, but maybe Apple would demand only original/paywall content?
Apple better be careful, they're already coming under attack for the App Store policies and this could simply give another reason for EU regulators to go after them.
[doublepost=1553122674][/doublepost]Also, I wonder about free sites? The CBC in Canada, or Slate/Vox/The Atlantic? They have free access now, but do they get some action if they also offer their articles through the Apple News service?
Would be an easy way to make more money I would assume, but maybe Apple would demand only original/paywall content?
Good reporting/investigating isn't free. I know lots of free news sites but I can't think of one I'd really call good. Some are better than others, but it's not surprising when you find out a fact reported by a news source is slanted toward whatever beliefs the owners of that service happens to have.
The only newsmen I trust are Carl Kolchak and Les Nessman.
And zero people will pay for this service anyway, regardless of whether NYT or Washington Post are included. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Already have a subscription to WaPo to pwn Individual 1.
Don't want the New York Times, because they are crap journalism.
Everything I ever want to read on WSJ is usually pushed beyond the paywall, but ok I guess.
Don't want the New York Times, because they are crap journalism.
Everything I ever want to read on WSJ is usually pushed beyond the paywall, but ok I guess.