'Wired' Drops Paywalls for Articles Based on Public Records Requests, Urges Other Sites to Follow (freedom.press) 26
Wired's web site "is going to stop paywalling articles that are primarily based on public records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act," their global editorial director announced this week:
They're called public records for a reason, after all. And access to public documents is more important than ever at this moment, with government websites and records disappearing... [S]ome may argue that, from a business standpoint, not charging for stories primarily relying on public records automatically means fewer subscriptions and therefore less revenue. We disagree.
Sure, the FOIA process is time- and labor-intensive. Reporters face stonewalling, baseless denials, lengthy appeals processes, and countless other obstacles and delays. Investigative reports based on public records are among the most expensive stories to produce and share with the public... But while some readers might not subscribe to outlets that give away some of their best journalism for free, it's just as possible that readers will recognize this sacrifice and reward these outlets with more traffic and subscriptions in the long run...
We hope others will follow Wired's lead (and shoutout to outlets like 404 Media that also make their FOIA-based reporting available for free). We also hope those who stand to benefit from these outlets' leadership (that's you, reader) will do their part and subscribe if you can afford it. They're not asking for an arm and a leg... The Fourth Estate needs to step up and invest in serving the public during these unprecedented times. And the public needs to return the favor and support quality journalism, so that hopefully one day we can do away with those annoying paywalls altogether.
Sure, the FOIA process is time- and labor-intensive. Reporters face stonewalling, baseless denials, lengthy appeals processes, and countless other obstacles and delays. Investigative reports based on public records are among the most expensive stories to produce and share with the public... But while some readers might not subscribe to outlets that give away some of their best journalism for free, it's just as possible that readers will recognize this sacrifice and reward these outlets with more traffic and subscriptions in the long run...
We hope others will follow Wired's lead (and shoutout to outlets like 404 Media that also make their FOIA-based reporting available for free). We also hope those who stand to benefit from these outlets' leadership (that's you, reader) will do their part and subscribe if you can afford it. They're not asking for an arm and a leg... The Fourth Estate needs to step up and invest in serving the public during these unprecedented times. And the public needs to return the favor and support quality journalism, so that hopefully one day we can do away with those annoying paywalls altogether.
Or (Score:5, Interesting)
https://github.com/bpc-clone/b... [github.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Or (Score:4, Informative)
"Extension is no longer hosted on GitHub due to DMCA takedown notice (check X or Google)."
"PS update channel isn't affected though."
There is no data (Score:3)
That can convince me paywalls actually work in providing more revenue compared to sites who do not use them.
Re: There is no data (Score:4, Insightful)
That may be true but the alternative is advertising which is obviously a terrible way to fund a site. It's bad UX and privacy for users and influences decisions toward corporate interests.
Paying for news is now a critical component of democracy.
Re: There is no data (Score:3)
> Paying for news is now a critical component of democracy.
Not really a new thing - they charged for copies of the Federalist Papers. Ironically, they did not sell well.
There is no paying for "news" (Score:3)
Paying for news is now a critical component of democracy.
Where can someone like me pay for "news" in general? As I understand it, one can only pay for each individual publication. A subscription to Wired buys me zero (0) articles on NYT, WaPo, or WSJ, for example. And unlike with scripted video, where it's practical to subscribe to a service for one month out of the year and switch to one of 11 other major streaming services for the next month, news and live sports have a much shorter shelf life, and one won't be able to cycle back to an article before Slashdot's
Re: (Score:3)
Well there is Apple News
https://www.apple.com/apple-ne... [apple.com]
Is it worth buying a Mac mini for Apple News+? (Score:2)
From the linked page, I see $13/mo (nice) and unavailability on web, X11/Linux, and Android (less nice). This means I'd also need to shell out several hundred dollars for a new enough Mac, iPhone, or iPad to run the reader app. My newest Apple device is a Mac mini from 2009 with macOS 10.9 "Mavericks". How could I determine whether it's new enough?
what grinds my gears (Score:5, Interesting)
The old wired vs new wired (Score:2)
The old wired was about technology and innovation
The new wired since 2016 is about technology, innovation and a dedicated focus on bringing into many articles a left-wing set of talking points for agenda pushing purposes.
I used to read wired for the technology and innovation news; don't want to read it for rehashing the cliche political talking points for agenda pushing purposes.
Re: (Score:2)
By what means do you pay for the journalism you read?
Re: (Score:2)
ETHICS IN JOURNALISM ended with PAYWALLS (Score:5, Informative)
Before I compliment Wired, I'm taking this opportunity to point out the "news" sites have become a travesty. No editors. No copy reviewers. Paywalls. Pop-up ads. No "show your work" or "cite your sources". ETHICS IN JOURNALISM MUST COME BACK. And with that, the compliment:
Good on Wired for making this earth-shattering move.
But yet it's as if paywalls was a "natural thing" that just had to be, but they are gracious to remove it. No. They CHOSE to implement Paywalls and they CHOSE how many ads pop up and they CHOSE not to show their work. But now they're trying to fix ... that thing... they broke... for another buck.
Paywalls and popup ads are what makes news websites a PITA, but good on Wired for relenting on SOME but not ALL of their content. I support SOME sites, and here's that pitch:
Mike Masnick and Team from Techdirt.com have been saying for YEARS "Why is it these big news sites can report on a lawsuit, and they clearly have read the [public] filing... but can't be bothered to post it so we -- the readers -- can see it too?"
I call upon every source of information, whether news or "entertainment" (Yeah, Fox, that's you) to not hide their content behind a dumpy paywall, not blizzard our eyes with ads, and SHOW US YOUR SOURVE MATERIAL when it's public. Like lawsuits.
Not everyone can afford PACER. RECAP is free. The extra 5-10 seconds to have your browser plugin share from A to B and then post that link is meaningful to us the readers.
SHOW JOURNALISTIC ETHICS. STOP HIDING BEHIND A PAYWALL OR ADWALL. POST SOURCE DOCUMENTS.
If you think this is a rant, think back to elementary school ("show your work") or high school ("cite your sources") or college ("make your citation better"). ETHICS IN JOURNALISM seemed to have ended in the PAYWALL/ADWALL days. That's probably when editors were "let go" and spellcheckers ("AI") became authors' reviewers.
HEY /. readers. Send a message to the Mod-of-the-day. Just post below if you agree or disagree. Odds are 100% you're in one category or the other. Let the mods know if you'd RATHER HAVE PAYWALLS (that thousands of people are working around daily) or AD BLIZZARDS (same) or NO SOURCE MATERIAL... or whether you want it all... and... like The Guardian, or TOI, and others... offer to "pay what you can to support ethical journalism."
Your vote counts.
E
Re: (Score:2)
ETHICS IN JOURNALISM ended with unpaid journalism (Score:3)
Before I compliment Wired, I'm taking this opportunity to point out the "news" sites have become a travesty. No editors. No copy reviewers. Paywalls. Pop-up ads. No "show your work" or "cite your sources". ETHICS IN JOURNALISM MUST COME BACK.
People don't want to pay for news any more. If they expect news to be free, they should expect no editors, no copy reviewers, no fact checking, and unpaid reporters.
You get what you pay for.
Pay walls aren't the problem (Score:2)
Having all mass media owned by a handful corrupt ultra wealthy plutocrats is the problem we're at right now.
There is 'fact checking' in news reporting (Score:2)
It's called "does the article, its 'facts' and quotes agree with the political views of one side of the political spectrum"
Re: ETHICS IN JOURNALISM ended with PAYWALLS (Score:3)
If you think this is a rant, think back to elementary school ("show your work") or high school ("cite your sources") or college ("make your citation better"). ETHICS IN JOURNALISM seemed to have ended in the PAYWALL/ADWALL days.
I'm sorry but you sound like a crazy person that somehow isn't aware that journalism predates the internet? Paying for a paper is weird? What is supposed to pay the salary of everyone doing the work you want to see? You're literally asking for free labor. You want funding from product placement like YouTube streamers, and that's supposed to bring in the ethics? Wtf?! In the time it took you to write that long assed post you never stopped to think this through even part way?
What strikes me as humorous... (Score:3)
A plural of event is trend (Score:3)
It takes at least two events to form a trend. The first was 404 Media, and the second is Wired.
Based on public records (Score:2)
'Wired' Drops Paywalls for Articles Based on Public Records Requests, ...
While those records still exist, and haven't been purged, anyway ... (sigh)
Kudos and common sense. (Score:2)