I wonder if the service will allow existing subscribers to certain news outlets to log in with their existing id? It would deprive Apple of that extra revenue but it would be annoying to have to use Apple News for those various channels and then safari and visit individual sites for others. Personally I’d certainly rather continue subscribing to The Guardian via their own site but accessing it on Apple news so they can get the full benefit of my support of their coverage.
The NYT ceased being objective journalism and new reporters years ago. Even if articles contain lots of actual facts, the headlines and ways those facts are reported are biased to push the liberal progressive or sometimes just the Democrat view. They've long been a joke.
You do realize the progress is considered a good thing right? So are progressives.
When I was a kid I delivered a newspaper 6 days per week. I did not ask the publisher for 50% of the profits. Apple needs to get over itself.
Were you paid anything for delivery? Were you employed by a delivery service or such? I didn’t see mention of volunteering.
I get your point, but Apple would be delivering, in a sense, so would seem appropriate compensation would be due. But the key word, and to your point, is “appropriate”. Heheheh.
No surprise. NYT, WaPo are thriving now, and are well known brands with little to gain. WSJ with its connections to stock information is more likely to monetize Apple eco in various ways. Maybe alliance will help Apple's anemic Stock app.
The New York Times is worth every penny you pay it... for top-level news coverage. Thank God for them.
Too bad Bezos won't give up his love of profit, but that's that.
I'll definitely subscribe to Apple News Service long enough to see if it is worth it to me... and if I have enough time to also read the NYT, the Guardian, the Huffington Post, and The Nation, that I subscribe to.
All Americans _need_ to be informed in these dark days of Donald. It's your civic duty.
Yes, we really need NYT and WaPo to put out 10 stories a day about trump based on unsubstantiated anonymous leakers in these “dark days” lol. What a joke.
We don’t need agenda-based, biased MSM organizations that consistently put out 93% negative coverage of one person. That’s not news. That’s biased opinion fed to sheep.
Apple may be one of the only hopes to facilitate objective journalism. I’m actually very much looking forward for trying out the Apple news service.
I love the Trumpian logic: If it reports the stupid, crazy, UnAmerican things the dotard says and does, then it must be "biased opinion"!
This news doesn’t hurt my feelings at all. The New York Slimes isn’t really news anymore.
Absolutely ridiculous. I read the 125 Pulitzer Prize-winning NYT every day and it's chock full of news — maybe you bought a knockoff?
You Fake News™ types are really just clearly suckers for the age-old propaganda/disinformation campaign that Trump is recycling from the Soviets, Nazis, tin pot dictatorships, etc. Oldest trick in the book.
I simply said I didn’t like the New York Times (“Slimes”) and you have resorted to name-calling; have immediately assumed I am Trump supporter; and suggested that I support Nazi tactics for spreading propaganda.
Good grief. Let’s go ahead and lock comments, shall we admins?
If you give it, you should be able to take it. But few Trump supporters can.
The NYT ceased being objective journalism and new reporters years ago. Even if articles contain lots of actual facts, the headlines and ways those facts are reported are biased to push the liberal progressive or sometimes just the Democrat view. They've long been a joke.
Only if you believe Trump and his official propaganda outlet: FauxNews. I prefer reality.
Great news about WSJ joining. Will definitely give the new Apple news service a try.
Yes, while the WSJ opinion sections are extremely conservative and totally biased. they're news sections are quite neutral and grounded in reality combined with some great reporting. And, unlike FauxNews, even their opinion sections are usually based on fact and reality (but with a conservative viewpoint). This will be a great addition to the service and one I will use often -- probably daily.
The New York Times is worth every penny you pay it... for top-level news coverage. Thank God for them.
Too bad Bezos won't give up his love of profit, but that's that.
I'll definitely subscribe to Apple News Service long enough to see if it is worth it to me... and if I have enough time to also read the NYT, the Guardian, the Huffington Post, and The Nation, that I subscribe to.
All Americans _need_ to be informed in these dark days of Donald. It's your civic duty.
I don’t like Donald very much, but dark days? Where were these truth tellers in Obama years?
He wasn’t fucking up the country every week while lining his pockets and those of family members while also banging porn stars and bribing them to keep quiet about it. Oh and sucking up to dictators who he believes are “good guys”. None of this is normal presidential behavior. We didn’t have to talk about it during the Obama years because none of that happened. This isn’t rocket science.
You can always tell when a Trumper lost an argument -- they resort to "WhatAboutIsm".
I do subscribe to both the NYT and WP. One thing I have noticed is they very frequently intersperse their opinion pieces among their journalism pieces. Their legitimate news tends to be well researched and well presented. Their opinion pieces are almost totally liberally biased with a few token conservative commentators thrown in (apparently just to generate forum arguments).
That's the one area I think news can be improved. Move the opinion pieces off the front page to a separate section. Make it very clear the news is independent and generally fair, even though how a news article is written can still be biased. We need more news outlets that we can trust to dig deep and give us all the facts. Save the political hit pieces for somewhere else. Every editorial board is going to have its opinion, and it is well within their rights to write about it, but it should never be given as much publicity and credibility as a news article that is held to the journalistic ethical standards.
For example, the NYT article digging into how Trump's real estate empire used related shell corporations to artificially inflate the cost of rental unit repairs and justify rent rate increases was very well written. The followup opinion pieces calling for Trump's head, investigations by every possible agency that could have jurisdiction, outlining every way they could think of to get every person to flip on Trump, etc. were way over the top and designed to elicit a particular emotional response rather than letting the reader figure out what they thought based on the facts.
This news doesn’t hurt my feelings at all. The New York Slimes isn’t really news anymore.
Absolutely ridiculous. I read the 125 Pulitzer Prize-winning NYT every day and it's chock full of news — maybe you bought a knockoff?
You Fake News™ types are really just clearly suckers for the age-old propaganda/disinformation campaign that Trump is recycling from the Soviets, Nazis, tin pot dictatorships, etc. Oldest trick in the book.
With a diatribe like that, jumping to all manner of conclusions with 0 facts about what the other poster meant, you might want to look in the mirror as to what the problem is...
Sounds like this will be quite a service. I don't expect to be on board though. The free News App has never been available in Canada. I doubt the pay service will be available here either. Regardless, $10/mo is more than I want to pay. I just don't have time to to read enough to make it worth it. I'll stick to BBC and CBC.
You really need Apple News! It's been announced for Canada for some time
Great news about WSJ joining. Will definitely give the new Apple news service a try.
Yes, while the WSJ opinion sections are extremely conservative and totally biased. they're news sections are quite neutral and grounded in reality combined with some great reporting. And, unlike FauxNews, even their opinion sections are usually based on fact and reality (but with a conservative viewpoint). This will be a great addition to the service and one I will use often -- probably daily.
I will start by saying - I am not American, I don't vote for your president, and don't follow US politics too closely (personally I can't take the 24 hour election cycle that lasts all year, every year). I do read some each week though to be informed at the high level.
What I find funny is that both sides think that "their side" is balanced, and the other ones are biased. From what I read: - CNN, NYT, WaPo are Democrat biased - Fox News, WSJ are Republican biased
For example, the NYT article digging into how Trump's real estate empire used related shell corporations to artificially inflate the cost of rental unit repairs and justify rent rate increases was very well written. The followup opinion pieces calling for Trump's head, investigations by every possible agency that could have jurisdiction, outlining every way they could think of to get every person to flip on Trump, etc. were way over the top and designed to elicit a particular emotional response rather than letting the reader figure out what they thought based on the facts.
You have to remember that Trump and his family operated out of NYC and were despised by the general population there long before the presidential campaign. They were wise to how Trump operated decades ago.
Comments
You do realize the progress is considered a good thing right? So are progressives.
I get your point, but Apple would be delivering, in a sense, so would seem appropriate compensation would be due. But the key word, and to your point, is “appropriate”. Heheheh.
This will be a great addition to the service and one I will use often -- probably daily.
That's the one area I think news can be improved. Move the opinion pieces off the front page to a separate section. Make it very clear the news is independent and generally fair, even though how a news article is written can still be biased. We need more news outlets that we can trust to dig deep and give us all the facts. Save the political hit pieces for somewhere else. Every editorial board is going to have its opinion, and it is well within their rights to write about it, but it should never be given as much publicity and credibility as a news article that is held to the journalistic ethical standards.
For example, the NYT article digging into how Trump's real estate empire used related shell corporations to artificially inflate the cost of rental unit repairs and justify rent rate increases was very well written. The followup opinion pieces calling for Trump's head, investigations by every possible agency that could have jurisdiction, outlining every way they could think of to get every person to flip on Trump, etc. were way over the top and designed to elicit a particular emotional response rather than letting the reader figure out what they thought based on the facts.
I will start by saying - I am not American, I don't vote for your president, and don't follow US politics too closely (personally I can't take the 24 hour election cycle that lasts all year, every year). I do read some each week though to be informed at the high level.
What I find funny is that both sides think that "their side" is balanced, and the other ones are biased. From what I read:
- CNN, NYT, WaPo are Democrat biased
- Fox News, WSJ are Republican biased
Is it really that hard to see?