The BBC is launching a paywall in the US
Technology
67
Beiträge
42
Kommentatoren
129
Aufrufe
-
It does actually seem like it's only the US for now
Unless I've misunderstood your comment
BBC article:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2vgkn7w10oI asked OP to update the title in another comment which they did (and appreciate) but it made this comment of mine confusing
. The original title didn’t have any mention of which country. It just said they were adding a paywall -
Time to unfollow them, I guess.
Guess I’ll be using VPN
-
Time to unfollow them, I guess.
Makes sense, we pay our licence fee for our public service, why should people abroad get for free what we have to pay for?
I was happy with the current arrangement of adverts supporting the service use abroad, but if it has to migrate to a subscription model to meet modern demands then that's the way it is.
I wouldn't go to another country and ask them to make one of their government's national public services free for me to use, after all.
-
Makes sense, we pay our licence fee for our public service, why should people abroad get for free what we have to pay for?
I was happy with the current arrangement of adverts supporting the service use abroad, but if it has to migrate to a subscription model to meet modern demands then that's the way it is.
I wouldn't go to another country and ask them to make one of their government's national public services free for me to use, after all.
The world service was always free because it’s a propaganda platform that promotes Britain and British values abroad. I guess they are content just to push Reform propaganda to a domestic audience from now on.
-
The original title just said something like “BBC is now paywalled” making it sound like it applied to more than 1 of the 195 (worldometers.info recognised) countries in the world.
I’m not British but it’d be pretty alarming to hear that the BBC was adding a paywall that applied to the British if I was British
Honestly this sucks balls for the US. One more credible news source made less accessible.
-
Given that I'm stateside, this makes me sad. But given that they are funded by UK taxpayers, this is probably the right move.
Of course, that's just one less outlet for USA citizens to get accurate journalism (better than here, anyway) about what's happening in our country. Hope Al Jazeera doesn't follow suit.
Although, you could also argue that those taxes pay for informing and influencing citizens of foreign nations.
America’s media ecosystem is dominated by Fox, Sinclair, and other state party media players. There is a strategic benefit to having a media outlet that doesn’t run through the state media filter.
-
Exactly this. Isn't the point of the BBC world service to communicate/propagandise the British view of what's happening in the world to other countries? Imagine Russia Today adding a paywall? It's counter to the entire point! I think you may be on to something about this being a concession to Trump.
Actually, the World Service will remain accessible, but that’s also not where most people go these days.
-
They're not that great anyway. They're barely holding on to my personal list of reliable sources. If I really need something, there are other places to go. Good luck BBC.
Any recommendations for a good replacement? I check BBC world on the daily but will be stopping as soon as this kicks in.
-
So that sounds to me that Americans should use a VPN to pretend they are accessing the website from Europe
Seems like a high bar for checking the news. I'll just switch to a different news outlet.
Shame to further isolate the US towards the largely crappy intranational journalism options.
-
Any recommendations for a good replacement? I check BBC world on the daily but will be stopping as soon as this kicks in.
The Guardian isn't horrible, but not perfect. Reuters, if you squint, is pretty good 3/4 of the time. Propublica is great for investigative journalism. All of them have horrible headline writers at least half the time. Politico isn't worth checking, but every month or so, you might miss something. It's a mixed bag basically, so you have to check out a few.
I try to post the "real" stuff (not what trump says, but what he and the republicans are doing) on politics at sh.itjust.works on weekdays. It's US based and I'm anti-right.
-
Makes sense, we pay our licence fee for our public service, why should people abroad get for free what we have to pay for?
I was happy with the current arrangement of adverts supporting the service use abroad, but if it has to migrate to a subscription model to meet modern demands then that's the way it is.
I wouldn't go to another country and ask them to make one of their government's national public services free for me to use, after all.
Nah mate. Information is free the second it leaves its source. Any attempt to curtail it after then is just a cunt's trick.
-
Time to unfollow them, I guess.
As a Canadian, I'd be upset if we got paywalled. The BBC is where I go to for trusted news on international concerns.
Understandable, but I'd still be upset.
-
Makes sense, we pay our licence fee for our public service, why should people abroad get for free what we have to pay for?
I was happy with the current arrangement of adverts supporting the service use abroad, but if it has to migrate to a subscription model to meet modern demands then that's the way it is.
I wouldn't go to another country and ask them to make one of their government's national public services free for me to use, after all.
BBC shows ads on some foreign services, but not in the UK
-
Time to unfollow them, I guess.
The UK obviously is no longer a superpower. But the BBC is the cornerstone of the UKs modern global soft power projection. Broadcasting it free projects the UK government’s voice around the world directly into homes, influencing world policy to their liking.
Putting a paywall in the US sends a message that they feel it is not needed or not effective in the US market.
It also mirrors what paid sport broadcasting in the UK has done. Paywall it for short term gain, at the expense of long term viewership growth. The UK is struggling.
-
The Guardian isn't horrible, but not perfect. Reuters, if you squint, is pretty good 3/4 of the time. Propublica is great for investigative journalism. All of them have horrible headline writers at least half the time. Politico isn't worth checking, but every month or so, you might miss something. It's a mixed bag basically, so you have to check out a few.
I try to post the "real" stuff (not what trump says, but what he and the republicans are doing) on politics at sh.itjust.works on weekdays. It's US based and I'm anti-right.
Thanks. Guardian might not be a bad alternative to try BTW, Sh.itjust.works isn't US based.
-
The UK obviously is no longer a superpower. But the BBC is the cornerstone of the UKs modern global soft power projection. Broadcasting it free projects the UK government’s voice around the world directly into homes, influencing world policy to their liking.
Putting a paywall in the US sends a message that they feel it is not needed or not effective in the US market.
It also mirrors what paid sport broadcasting in the UK has done. Paywall it for short term gain, at the expense of long term viewership growth. The UK is struggling.
Paywall it for short term gain, at the expense of long term viewership growth.
Making a company worse for increased short term revenue, at the cost of customer retention, product quality, etc. causing increased turnover which further compounds all the other steps. Is a common issue among all modern companies.
In short, there was a shift in MBA education a while back that includes a bunch of lies-by-omission and misrepresented data. Meaning that the only thing on their mind when they graduate, is to please investors at any all costs, including company longevity.
-
Nah mate. Information is free the second it leaves its source. Any attempt to curtail it after then is just a cunt's trick.
I imagine you wouldn't be saying this if it was your work being used.
If you went through the painstaking effort or writing a book or something, I imagine you'd be pretty unhappy if nobody wanted to reimburse you, and you were called a cunt for wanting to be paid for your labour.
-
And just at a time when the US really needs a decent news service…
I am sure this was discussed at the Starmer - Trump talks as a way to further isolate Americans from the truth.
I guess it’s just Al-Jazeera now…
Decent News Service?
The BBC is at best problematic. -
Thanks. Guardian might not be a bad alternative to try BTW, Sh.itjust.works isn't US based.
BTW, Sh.itjust.works isn’t US based.
I know. Reuters is owned by a Canadian billionaire family if that's important to you.
(Scroll down to the comments for info) https://sh.itjust.works/comment/12174374
-
I imagine you wouldn't be saying this if it was your work being used.
If you went through the painstaking effort or writing a book or something, I imagine you'd be pretty unhappy if nobody wanted to reimburse you, and you were called a cunt for wanting to be paid for your labour.
I work for a living, so I'm used to my work being exploited as a matter of course.
