Screenshot says it. Please recommend alternative Leftist news sources. I am in UK but I read news from anywhere, any language if my browser can access it/translate it.

Here in UK, I have tried The Canary, Novara Media, Byline Times, Morning Star - all have strengths and weaknesses, none are a perfect fit. Still looking for my ‘daily paper’.

Thanks!

  • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    43·
    18 hours ago

    I would argue that everybody has a line in the sand they don’t want to cross.

    For most of us, we don’t mind ads as long as we can avoid them with adblock. Which honestly just externalizes the problem onto people without it.

    It seems to be a reasonable position to not accept a free site with personalized ads, because of the privacy costs.

    It’s also unfortunate, for the newspaper to go this direction.

    • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      8·
      18 hours ago

      Sure, personalised ads can be seen as a form of an invasion of privacy, and everybody has a right to not engage with any organisation for any reason they like. But ads are an imperfect solution to the fact that it’s impossible to run a news organisation at that scale on voluntary donations and un-personalised ads alone, and it’s definitely preferable (in my view, at least) to having a total paywall.

      Unless you have an innovative alternative income source to propose, I’m not sure I see what alternative there is.

      • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        2·
        18 hours ago

        I’m a fan of 404media’s model, which does have ads, but gets most of its funding through subscribers. All their news journalism is free (behind a login page), but they have premium content like behind the scenes blogs and an expanded podcast for subscribers only.

        I get that the only reason they can do this is because

        1. They benefitted from traditional media organizations to grow their skills and contacts before striking out on their own.
        2. They run a lean organization and have a limited “beat”.
        3. They encourage a parasocial relationship with their readers through the free podcast, etc. (not necessarily a bad thing).

        But it is an interesting model. I’d subscribe if I could afford it. And maybe someday I will.

        • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          2·
          17 hours ago

          I think 3) is a really interesting point, and probably the primary reason why a model like that may be less viable for e.g. the Guardian. I think having that parasocial relationship is key to having people take interest enough to be willing to pay for the extra content around the main news output. My concern is that a model like that might incentivise being intentionally divisive and/or making the main content be more like entertainment than information.

          • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            2·
            15 hours ago

            Only time will tell, I can see how that would be the risk. I’ve noticed how Sabine Hossenfelter started out with science news and followed her audience right-ward to anti-science crazy town. I have more hope for classically-trained journalists with ethics to follow and reputation to uphold, but you’re right that pressure is real