The Washington Post deserves your support


#61

Meanwhile, another Washington DC paper is running this poll

http://www.washingtontimes.com/polls/2017/may/18/trump-victim-greatest-witch-hunt-history-us-politi/

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised at the results be it still is depressing. 76% say yes.


#62

Sample so far is around 1900. Hahaha

Someone put Reddit on this


#63

Ugh, the Washington Times. A paper founded by Sun Myung Moon and wholly-owned by his church. It makes Fox News look fair and balanced.


#64

He threatened to do so on the campaign trail. And the libel reform thing was resurrected a couple of weeks back, shortly before the Comey situation blew up.


#65

I know he talked about libel reform, but did he specifically talk about the combination of Washington Post and Amazon?


#66

Yes, he did. Repeatedly. And in classic Trump fashion, he made no sense while doing so.


#67

Thanks, I hadn’t seen that before. Fortunately for Bezos Trump is incompetent and the fact he made such a blatant threat makes harder for the administration to actually file anti-trust charges.


#68

It’s $19 for international readers. I just sub :)


#69

So for what it’s worth, I’ve had to re-enable Ublock on WP site due to what appears to be constant traffic to/from something there when I allow ads. It’s annoying, though it isn’t on every page. I think that points to specific adds or perhaps site sections, but rather that troubleshoot it further, I’ve just blocked adds again.


#70

Maybe I’m being too spoiled by all these indie blogs/websites where once you pay for it, the ads were removed. So, I’m not pleased to see ads for a WP subscription I just signed up. I understand that they need it, much like a physical newspaper had ads, but just not used to the idea anymore.


#71

It’s because we have shifted to the idea that payment for a service, even news reporting, should constitute everything needed from a customer. Print media, TV, radio, satellite radio, they all still have ads, and damn they can be even MORE annoying when you shell out money for the service as a whole.

It’s got to be tough for them though, because it has always been part of their revenue stream to be able to do that.

That being said, as with ANY advertising on the internet, it needs to be non-obtrusive and not system impacting, or it runs the risk of getting completely countered with something like an ad blocker.


#72

Yeah. The thing about magazine ads is they don’t cause the pages to spontaneously catch fire, or jump all over the article you’re reading, or whatever.

I don’t mind having to look at ads as I scroll through a webpage. I mind that they crash my browser and jump in my face and darken everything else and cheat-click me into opening unwanted tabs, etc.

The concept of ad-supported content doesn’t bother me, even when I’m already paying for that content (within reason). But the execution at this current stage of online evolution is completely fucking godawful, as I think pretty much everyone acknowledges.


#73

WaPo has temporarily taken down their paywall because of the hurricane.


#74

I just noticed this in my email:
“After your initial 365 day term for $19.00, you will be charged $100.00 every 365 days until you cancel. You may cancel at any time.”

anyone notice this?


#75

That’s cheaper than their standard rate, iirc - I think it’s normally $9.99/month. Still, that makes it sound like a lump sum.


#76

Yeah, and I thought $19/year for international readers was perpetual - base on an observation from an European Qt3 Members up thread.


#77

I pay $100/year for LOTRO, I can pay that for a decent national newspaper that I look at almost every day. It’s cheaper than the NYT ($15/month).

That said, the website does piss me off with their intrusive pop-up ads and videos that play automatically. And 30-second ads for 30-second video clips. NYT has much less of that crap.


#78

After my free 6 months, I’m being charged $3.99 a month, which seems reasonable to me.


#79

According to the memo, management wants to end the paper’s long-standing practice of across-the-board percentage annual pay raises to create an “unprecedented” merit pay system and cut severance benefits. It also refuses to increase the 401(k) match from 1 percent.

The merit system would potentially freeze even inflation adjusted increases in pay for some employees for up to 30 months while others could get up to a 4 percent increase. Management has also proposed to cut severance pay and require any employee who accepts severance to waive their legal rights. When you do away with routine raises only the superstar reporters will wind up getting them. This would leave copy editors, video editors and others who are not the face of the paper on the losing end and increase inequality within the company.

Management has also offered a fallback proposal that will give employees a $600 payment in the first year and then an $8 raise per week in the second year.

This proposal comes with the added threat of an even worse proposal if the union does not agree to the current terms by Nov. 1, the bargaining committee said it its memo.


#80

For what it’s worth, this isn’t uncommon to have variable merit. Fuck all the rest of this bullshit though, it’s straight up robbery by the management.