this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2025
830 points (98.8% liked)

Not The Onion

18652 readers
949 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Tja@programming.dev 3 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Well, look at lemmy anytime someone posts a link that requires you to pay for the journalism. Pitchforks and torches. People don't want to pay for quality journalism, do they get whatever billionaires want to feed them.

[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

I never thought about it this way but it makes total sense. We get fed what rich people buy for us to consume… <cough.. cough … fox news>

[–] Credibly_Human@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Well, look at lemmy anytime someone posts a link that requires you to pay for the journalism. Pitchforks and torches.

People don't want to pay for something they don't think is quality.

It's not like these companies would clean up their act if they got another viable revenue stream. We can see that because when companies do, they regularly just keep the extra cash.

What you'd need is a boot strapped organization that actually had standards people cared about and didn't bend. Its an impossibly hard situation, yes, but that does not make your snark prescient or clever. More than that, it doesnt at all back up your conclusion that people don't want to pay for quality journalism. It just doesnt exist, because it gets bought out by billionaires.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It was bought by billionaires after people stopped paying.

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

it was already owned by billionaires when people were still paying

[–] Tja@programming.dev 1 points 4 days ago

If you want to think so to make yourself feel better...

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

anytime someone posts a link that requires you to pay for the journalism

People subscribing to random newspapers via links on Lemmy would not be a sustainable model for funding local journalism. And - historically - plenty of people did subscribe to local outlets. Plenty still do. Hell, go on Patreon or Substack and see how well the nascent podcast journalism marketplace is doing.

What changed over the last 40 years was a wave of M&As targeting smaller papers to consolidate the news markets. Case in point, my own city of Houston had half a dozen different newspapers chugging along just fine for decades. But because they were small, they were also very cheap. Loose monetary policy in the 90s made buying up papers very cheap. So the Houston Chronicle went around town buying the smaller papers and shutting them down. Now its the only major newspaper of record remaining.

"Well, people on Lemmy should have paid for more subscriptions to the Houston Post" is a fucking asinine statement, given that their stated reason for failure was cost of newsprint rising in the early 90s and they stopped existing before most of the people on this site were even born.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 0 points 5 days ago

I don't thing the likes of wsj, nyt or similar are "random newspapers", and they still get hate for asking for money. Bezos finds that useful.