I’m not sure there is a martlet for news aggregators. I think people generally like to shop around and pick and choose their sources independently.
I know I certainly don’t need someone curating my news for me.
Then you don’t understand News. It doesn’t curate news for you. You can choose any specific publications or topics you like and News will give that for you. Heck, you can even have News to be almost 100% Fox News.
Then why wouldn't I get Fox News and be even happier?!
Start by searching for Fox News. Adds it (hit the plus icon). Reading only what is on Fox News. In no time your feed will be full of Fox News.
I never use Apple news. But I can say the New York Times is an absolute disaster. The paper has always been biased, but they at least tried to offer a veneer of accountability and impartiality in the past. The opinion pages have now utterly infected the news room. They are 100% propaganda and fake news at this point. Anyone who has researched it knows they played an integral part in the “spygate“ scandal.
This decision is obviously about money. “Reader engagement” and “relationship with our readers “are just terms for “we weren’t making any money from it.”
Yeh, the far right thinks that anything not far right is "propaganda and fake news". LOL..
And, how and why would the NY Times help the New England Patriots spy on another team? Ridiculous!
My issue with the NYT, was they wanted to charge me to continue to read an article that was offered in the News+ app. I thought those articles were included in my subscription price, so, I stopped reading their articles.
Readership down because they are ultra left mouth piece press
Ah, the ignorant American turns up right on cue.
A) You haven't got the FAINTEST idea of what "ultra left" actually means.
The NYT is barely rated as ever-so-slightly left, but that's only because they continue to print fact-based articles.
😆😆😆😆😆😆
They are an over-the-top leftist political rag with zero credibility in journalism.
If they are so fact based, why do they have to have a full page spread on retractions for pretty much every article through the week?
You have zero clue about journalism. Sorry, but that’s the truth.
Corrections and retractions? That's the difference between fact based journalism and propaganda outlets.
Those that are fact based sometimes don't get it 100% correct the first time and issue corrections
Propaganda outlets have no need of corrections because its all lies and deception anyway.
Readership down because they are ultra left mouth piece press
Ah, the ignorant American turns up right on cue.
A) You haven't got the FAINTEST idea of what "ultra left" actually means.
The NYT is barely rated as ever-so-slightly left, but that's only because they continue to print fact-based articles.
C) Readership is way up for the paper generally, in point of fact -- which proves:
D) You're the one in the bubble, spouting right-wing parrot points.
Also: I note the article does not say they are leaving Apple News+. It's an odd omission.
Barely rated ever so slightly left.
They spent the last three years feeding you lies and got a Pulitzer “For deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically furthered the nation’s understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the President-elect’s transition team and his eventual administration“ They were wrong time and time again.
Their own response to the Tom Cotton op-Ed was embarrassing. They routinely change headlines and stories to please the Biden campaign. Do not cover one thing that puts the Biden campaign in a bad situation.
They only reason their readership is up because the far left wing needs something to grab on too to make it through the day.
Oh! So you believe the lies from the right wing propganda outlets? That's kind of silly. No, -- correction -- That's REALLY silly!
I have been wondering about the future of News -- and especially New+.
The NYTs was never part of News+ so, at best, we got the few articles they decided to share -- and the rest were teasers that hit a paywall if you tried to read them.
Probably the only reputable national paper that's part of News+ is the Wall Street Journal -- and even there is a highly cut down version of the real paper. Originally you could see all the articles by searching for the ones not explicitly shown -- but soon they removed that abilitiy too.
I think Apple needs to put some thought into this whole project -- or at least into their News+ which is mostly just magazines...
I never use Apple news. But I can say the New York Times is an absolute disaster. The paper has always been biased, but they at least tried to offer a veneer of accountability and impartiality in the past. The opinion pages have now utterly infected the news room. They are 100% propaganda and fake news at this point. Anyone who has researched it knows they played an integral part in the “spygate“ scandal.
This decision is obviously about money. “Reader engagement” and “relationship with our readers “are just terms for “we weren’t making any money from it.”
Yeh, the far right thinks that anything not far right is "propaganda and fake news". LOL..
And, how and why would the NY Times help the New England Patriots spy on another team? Ridiculous!
Similarly, the far left thinks anything that's not as far left as them is extreme right.
I have been wondering about the future of News -- and especially New+.
The NYTs was never part of News+ so, at best, we got the few articles they decided to share -- and the rest were teasers that hit a paywall if you tried to read them.
Probably the only reputable national paper that's part of News+ is the Wall Street Journal -- and even there is a highly cut down version of the real paper. Originally you could see all the articles by searching for the ones not explicitly shown -- but soon they removed that abilitiy too.
I think Apple needs to put some thought into this whole project -- or at least into their News+ which is mostly just magazines...
I seem to be the only one who quite likes Apple News. News is divisive, no matter what articles are chosen people will claim there is a bias one way or the other. I haven't noticed any real bias, though I have blocked the far left/right sources. I have access to Apple News+ too via a family member but don't subscribe myself, but apart from the Times (in the UK here) I never use the + part. However, I know Apple has a terrible habit of introducing something as the Next Big Thing™ and then abandoning it for years (Siri, Mac Pro, Apple Books etc.) so let's hope they don't assign this to the bin.
Readership down because they are ultra left mouth piece press
Ah, the ignorant American turns up right on cue.
A) You haven't got the FAINTEST idea of what "ultra left" actually means.
The NYT is barely rated as ever-so-slightly left, but that's only because they continue to print fact-based articles.
😆😆😆😆😆😆
They are an over-the-top leftist political rag with zero credibility in journalism.
If they are so fact based, why do they have to have a full page spread on retractions for pretty much every article through the week?
You have zero clue about journalism. Sorry, but that’s the truth.
I love that you point to the fact that a paper posts retractions as an indicator of bad journalism.
Owning up to mistakes is literally a hallmark of Credibility, ESPECIALLY in journalism. It’s why you never, EVER see Fox backtracking. Let alone Trump. Pretending that mistakes don’t happen is the first clue to identifying a liar.
I never use Apple news. But I can say the New York Times is an absolute disaster. The paper has always been biased, but they at least tried to offer a veneer of accountability and impartiality in the past. The opinion pages have now utterly infected the news room. They are 100% propaganda and fake news at this point. Anyone who has researched it knows they played an integral part in the “spygate“ scandal.
This decision is obviously about money. “Reader engagement” and “relationship with our readers “are just terms for “we weren’t making any money from it.”
The NYT has seen a massive spike in digital subscribers during the Trump administration and is by all public accounts doing well. They experienced a near death financial crisis as they transitioned to a paywall as subscribers dropped and ad revenue went away.
The paper went through multiple rounds of buy outs and layoffs as they streamlined the staff and rationalized the editorial process. They also sold off other assets-like TV stations to get the cash needed to make the transition. That process has largely been completed.
I agree that there is a bias problem in the political coverage and on the opinion pages. It is neither Democratic or Republican, but rather a corporatist centrist viewpoint that manages to aggravate progressives and conservatives equally. They are just as hostile to Bernie Sanders as they are to Trump.
They are also heavy handed in comment moderation. Comments too negative to their viewpoint get posted, but often many hours to days later- preventing them from being seen by most readers. Comments that follow the company line get posted almost immediately. Supposedly moderation is now mostly automated, so that is suspicious.
The recent handling of the Tom Cotton op-Ed is also a problem. I disagree with my Senator on most things, but his voice as a Senator is important and worthy of the opinion page.
Personally, one of the reasons I like Apple News is the lack of a comments section. Allowing reader comments to be appended to every news story is one of the biggest mistakes online news media have made in the internet age. It devalues the journalism above, and promotes the idea that random anonymous opinions are of equal or greater importance. (Yes, I am aware of the irony of writing this here.) A journalist can spend hours, days, weeks, or more working on a story, with the aid of original documentation, well-placed sources, fact-checkers and editors. All this is greatly diminished when an article is posted online and immediately appended by a commentariat that often doesn't read more than the headline before diving into the fray to take predictable but ill-informed positions. Many readers are then sucked into reading and/or participating he comment wars, with the actual journalism serving only as a highway marker pointing to the opinions below. This has led to fertile ground for politicians to dismiss journalism that they don't like as "fake news." Everybody thinks everything is just an opinion. On a secondary level, this also helps undermine things like science, because of the same inflated public valuation of opinion-based opinions. Rights come with responsibilities, and the ubiquitous appending of most journalism with reader comments has a tendency to promote an irresponsible approach to free speech.
Let’s be perfectly honest the reason that their readership was down, is they only allowed you to read one/two articles a week for free. If you wanted to read more you had to sign up for a monthly sub.
Here’s the REAL rub. I did subscribe to the NYT and when I tried to go from News+ to the full story, the NYT invited me to pay! Sounds like they see “relationship to readers” a one way street. Am letting my subscriptions lapse, tired of being treated like a stranger by them. Not only that, but they make you pay for a second subscription in order to access the crossword puzzles! Love their journalism; hate their business practices.
I have not experienced that issue. I think you may have a technical problem with "cookies" or some such thing.
NYT makes a lot of money off of their subscription. Apple News probably added very little, combined with not sharing user info and taking a 30% cut, the NYT decided it wasn’t worth it as a business venture.
Apple News is one of those things Apple keeps pushing but only does a halfway good job. It maybe good for smaller publications, but the NYT can live without it.
I’ve seen the NYT devolve over several decades into a poorly sourced and poorly written rumor mill. Their reporting over the past 4-5 years has been a disaster. I think they must be teetering near bankruptcy because the Buzzfeed-level trash coming out of their publication isn’t going to keep intelligent readers.
Comments
Yeh, telling the truth is now considered to be "ultra left" by the right wing cult.
You do know that all articles you read are chosen for you right?
Unless you write your own articles, all articles you read are chosen for you.
maybe do some basic research before spewing nonsense.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/315041/new-york-times-company-digital-subscribers/
Oh! So you believe the lies from the right wing propganda outlets? That's kind of silly. No, -- correction -- That's REALLY silly!
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-times/
I seem to be the only one who quite likes Apple News. News is divisive, no matter what articles are chosen people will claim there is a bias one way or the other. I haven't noticed any real bias, though I have blocked the far left/right sources. I have access to Apple News+ too via a family member but don't subscribe myself, but apart from the Times (in the UK here) I never use the + part. However, I know Apple has a terrible habit of introducing something as the Next Big Thing™ and then abandoning it for years (Siri, Mac Pro, Apple Books etc.) so let's hope they don't assign this to the bin.