The New York Times Removes Its Articles From Apple News (engadget.com) 62
Today, the New York Times announced that it is ending its partnership with Apple News and removing its articles from the platform. Engadget reports: The issue seems to be that while other services, like Google News, send readers to publishers' websites, Apple News generally keeps readers in the app. Or, as NYT puts it, Apple's approach does not align with The Times' goal of building direct relationships with paying readers.
"Core to a healthy model between The Times and the platforms is a direct path for sending those readers back into our environments, where we control the presentation of our report, the relationships with our readers, and the nature of our business rules," Meredith Kopit Levien, The Times' chief operating officer, wrote in a memo to employees. "Our relationship with Apple News does not fit within these parameters."
"Core to a healthy model between The Times and the platforms is a direct path for sending those readers back into our environments, where we control the presentation of our report, the relationships with our readers, and the nature of our business rules," Meredith Kopit Levien, The Times' chief operating officer, wrote in a memo to employees. "Our relationship with Apple News does not fit within these parameters."
How do you want to pay? (Score:5, Interesting)
Newspapers can get their revenues from either subscribers, ads, or whoever is giving the articles away...
Apple was offering NYT articles without a subscription nor ads... so they've better pay NYT enough or this doesn't work.
NYT is usually the first to walk from such things... next expect The AP to balk.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
News, especially from big corporations such as The New York Times, are either far-left or far-right these days, you never get the whole picture. Which is why I get all my news from The Onion, because at least I know I'm always being lied to in the most insane ways.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Browse FOXNEWS.com to see how they out-did the onion.
FTFY.
tracking (Score:2)
The issue is not about the âpresentationâ(TM) or the ârelationship with readersâ(TM). The issue is that NYT has to have good user tracking to provide well segmented audiences to itâ(TM)s advertisers. The advertising revenue for âanonymousâ(TM) users is significantly lower or NYT simply canâ(TM)t oppose rate under those constraints.
Re:tracking (Score:4, Insightful)
Could you post that again in English?
Great news! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"Great news!" I see what you did there.
Nope. (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0... [nytimes.com]
It's actually your hard right wing viewpoint that's on the decline. Your viewpoint is being run out of every major public platform, in fact. But hey, you still have gab and parler, right...?
Re:Nope. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Your either willfully ignorant, delusional or trolling. Conservatives have been getting censored on social media for years. Things have been ramping up massively with the 2020 election coming up. I'll show you clear evidence from an insider being honest about exactly what their doing at Facebook. I'll even link from a liberal news source so that you can avoid going to anything in the center or the right:
https://www.realclearpolitics.... [realclearpolitics.com]
You can find raw video at the following site:
https://www.projectveritas. [projectveritas.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You do understand that Facebook isn't the Internet, don't you...?
Re:Nope. (Score:4, Insightful)
NYTimes isn't perfect, but they're the one of the better sources of news, which is why I subscribe to them as one of my news sources.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
If you read it in the original context it makes sense. I don't necessarily agree with it, but it does make sense. He also said "property is liberty" and "property is impossible". They all make sense, in context.
Personally, I think the use of the word "is" in those sentences renders them non-sensical. Not meaningless, as everyone assigns some sort of meaning to them, but it's impossible to assign a consistent set of meanings. I could say, e.g., "without property, theft is impossible", and people would g
Re: (Score:2)
"Not being allowed to post what you want on somebody else's servers is not censorship."
Okay, so you're right that by repeating this over and over it did not change anything, but at the same time I pasted it at the beginning of my comment, my Amazon package arrived at the door and I received an email from a king in Nigeria asking for my help in return for five million dollars. Coincidence? I think not!
Re: (Score:1)
No one remembers when the NYT was exposed as being prejudiced against India, because no such thing has happened. Your "evidence" against the NYT is from an Indian right wing opinion site that regularly publishes false stories.
Let me repeat the exact text from the NYT which your article claims proves it is racist:
"It has been years since Detroit, birthplace of the American auto industry, was a steady producer of the manufacturing jobs that defined it as the Motor City. But its comeback is entering a new phas
Re: (Score:2)
I believe The Times deserves a fair amount of criticism but you completely miss the mark with your post. Your comment that you "can hardly read NYT articles anymore" is silly because it's obvious that you haven't actually read the paper much. Its opinion page is terrible, but primarily because they go for the "both sides" angle and post a bunch of trash that you would actually like.
I would argue that the is a terrible thing because it has functioned as the de factor national newspaper for quite a long time.
Re: (Score:2)
The New York Times hasn't been a national newspaper...ever. It represents the viewpoints of a tiny number of people clustered on the East Coast, and an even tinier number of people elsewhere. But don't believe me, let's ask the Times itself:
"Living in New York makes a lot of people think that way, and a lot of people who think that way find their way to New York (me, for one). The Times has chosen to be an unashamed product of the city whose name it bears, a condition magnified by the been-there-done-th
Re:Heh, heh (Score:5, Informative)
Does the NY Times have a very NYC bend to it? Heck yes it does. But it does cover the country and national news to a degree that few other news sources are capable of doing.
Re: (Score:1)
"paper of record"
Pretty sure social media completely destroyed the myth that most journalists (and many other professions) were objective or really care.
We now have 24/7 instant data, often with video, multiple fact checking institutes, and fake news is still rampant. Fake news was likely worse in the pre-internet age but we just didn't know it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure social media completely destroyed the myth that most journalists (and many other professions) were objective or really care.
You are aware I hope that social media is the #1 spot for any disinformation campaign. Fake news, trolling, smoke screens, FUD... it usually starts with "social" media (the name is becoming quite ironic).
It's an intellectual tragedy that there are seemingly more people willing to trust a social media posting from a random, uncertain source, than the actual media. Of course this cognitive fallacy has received plenty of promotion in recent years, from a certain reality-TV celebrity somehow turned president.
Re: (Score:1)
Interesting story. Here's a similar story the New York Times ran, with the same information, from Fox News:
https://www.foxnews.com/story/... [foxnews.com]
So were they obeying the CIA, too? Also the dozens of other news sources that ran this same story on the same day? A conspiracy of everyone?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that is newsworthy.
Re: (Score:2)
If that story was about Obama, you and Sean Hannity would be treating it as newsworthy and would be loudly screaming about it.
It is real news. If you want, you could just read the separate reporting in the Washington Post [washingtonpost.com]
Re: Heh, heh (Score:2)
Yet hardly a day goes by without a NYT article on Slashdot, why? https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
And NOBODY is disputing the leaked intelligence report, only that Trump was unaware of it.
"I believe it may have been" in the written President's Daily Brief, or PDB, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, said in an interview. - top Republican on the Foreign Affairs Committee
The intel is what it is, it's just not enough to convince Trump to do anything with Russia. The question Republicans in Congress are asking them
Remove Facebook (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Remove Facebook (Score:4, Insightful)
NYT should also remove the Facebook button from its website.
As should slashdot.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Just as long as you remember where Faux News came from in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
You only say that because you find some of the things their investigations discover inconvenient.
Re: (Score:2)
Let me fix that for you, The New York Times 'WAS', although USA corporate media is so bad, you can still be really bad and be top of the shit pile that is American main stream media, the worlds leading corporate propaganda network, no advertisers lie to big to end up on front pages as the truth, not one but in true cabal nature 'ALL'. At least you did restrict that 'top' to in the US but then again many of the independents are much better, you would not to restrict that top to 'US Corporate Main Stream Medi
The NYT doesn't write news articles anymore anyway (Score:3, Insightful)
I am not paying to each newspaper one by one (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And the problem seems to be that there is no decent way to pay for that access. Everybody who sets themselves up as a news aggregator want's to control the presentation, or what is presented. This is as true of the paid sites like Apple as it is of the "free" sites line NewsNow.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
And jcr has taken a right-wing viewpoint for every post he's ever made with a political opinion. What's your point? We all know you're right-wing so shouldn't you support liberal discourse with the rest of the people on your "side"?
Or is it only an affront to liberties when your voice is drowned out?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're a fool who can't understand that not everyone fits into one of the two boxes in your tiny little mind.
You must easily make friends.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've been a hard-line Libertarian
Yeah, which is by definition hard right-wing.