News websites wanting to charge you money in order to read their articles. 💵
IT’S A BASIC HUMAN RIGHT FOR F*CKS SAKE!!
You must log in or register to comment.
Since when is access to news a human right?
But you have always needed to pay for news, well before the internet, either directly or indirectly
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was created on December 10th, 1948.
Here’s a link related to Article 19 (the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers):
https://www.unesco.org/en/right-information
And while you do have a point when it comes to the history of paying for the news, i think there’s a clear distinction between paying for a paper newsletter or Cable TV, and having to pay for a small, individual article, no more than 2 pages long. (Because let’s be real, so far there are no news websites worth paying a subscription for).
It also describes a right to own property but I don’t think that anyone would argue that you should receive that property for free.
You know what really grinds my gears?
Entitlement.
You know what really grinds my gears?
Someone not pushing the clutch all the way in when changing gear?
Oohhh whenever i hear something like that…
The other driver has to change his route to the hospital 🏥
Me not easing off the pedals enough when changing gears on an internal hub bike… and then hearing the hub fully engage the new gear later on with crunching noises 🥴🥴
You want free news? You get ai generated articles which cover the basics… hopefully.
You want good news? You have to pay.
Or you could go to npr and pbs. Public, free journalism
Yes, my country also has decent public journalism channels
Then your first comment about free news just being ai garbage meant nothing?
It is a dramatization, call it artist freedom. Things are never entirely black and white in real life. In real life everything is a grey area, but it’s no fun to make elaborate and nuanced statements on an internet forum where short form is the leading narative. Most people won’t even read a comment or a post that has more than three sentences. Also, you shouldn’t take a short message like this as fact. I, for instance, always assume short comments are written on the toilet. That’ll put things in perspective a bit. Only once someone takes the effort to make a proper write up with actual sources included, where you can see there’s an actually effort made, than you can start thinking about truths and facts. Otherwise it’s just fun or an opinion at best.
I call it bullshit then. You put an opinion out there that you dont believe and you know isn’t true “because it’s fun”, and you’d rather get attention than be real.
Yes it is that black and white. You are right and I am wrong. Congratulations!
Your wording reminds me of this scene 😆
So… Which news website has good news again?
I’d say, a combination of publicly funded news sources, like bbc, pbs and reuters. Which are free sources, so that kindof disproves my point, but these do mostly cover the basics. Local news or news about stuff you’re interested in, is usually not covered there.
Most of them will just put up a soft-paywall, which are rather easy to get around. Sometimes as easy as clearing your cookies (or using an incognito tab).
That hasn’t been my case sadly :(
It depends on the site but there’s a few different ways to get around it. For example I didn’t even realize business insider had a paywall because somehow my AdBlock removes it. Some websites work with 12ft.io but lots block it now. If it’s one of the websites that give a limited amount of free articles open it in private browsing mode. And for others archive links seem to work.
