[marvin]

At this point, the problem with content subscriptions is ease of use and "fuck you, customer" experiences rather than willingness to pay. I'd gladly pay, say, $200 per year to never see a paywall or commercial and never have to worry about account registrations or overcharging.

But after paying $100 in for a single article I read in a Norwegian newspaper last year, due to a weekly subscription that had "compulsory auto-renewal" in the small print, and no payment confirmations other than the account statement of my rarely-checked bank account... Let's say I'm not so keen on managing 30+ subscriptions to different providers, keeping up with their terms of service and ensuring they don't screw me.

I'll gladly pay when a company is able to figure out the proper UX for this, and the content producers get their heads out of their asses and consent to a sane distribution agreement with them.

[52-6F-62]

Don't punish the publishers for this. They don't manage those aspects themselves, and haven't in a long time.

A couple of publishers do have stakes in those services (ex: Hearst, via https://www.cds-global.com/). At least in North America.

And for what it's worth—auto-renewal is standard and has been for a long time, like with most subscription/monthly services. I don't take that as a "fuck you" as you put it. Alternatively—a lot of people would be just as pissed off if their subscription automatically ended while they're waiting for their next issue.

Anyway I'm not sure I'm clear on why this means they should work for free?

[vertex-four]

https://about.pressreader.com/ - $360 a year, so a bit more expensive, but probably affordable on a tech salary if news is important to you.

[52-6F-62]

Fun fact: the Toronto Public Library provides free subscriptions to PressReader for those who live in the city limits or work or attend school here as long as you hold a library card.

It’s worth petitioning your local libraries to do the same.