this post was submitted on 19 May 2025
775 points (99.4% liked)

People Twitter

6990 readers
1887 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
775
Everything wants me to pay rent (lemmy.world)
submitted 9 hours ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works
105 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 25 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

How is that a boomer complaint? It’s basic. Microsoft Word should be buy once for 3 computers, as it always was until subs took over.

We can’t even read the news anymore without a sub.

I like the use of the word rent for this.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 hours ago

I think it depends on the type of software. Subscriptions do make sense for software that requires regular updates, e.g. something tax related, where you need it updated with the latest regulations every year. Basically for anything that won't be useful a year from the purchase date without feature updates.

[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works -1 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

The News is something you should have to pay a subscription for.

[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 6 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Nah, absolutely not. Putting a profit incentive on the news is how we end up with how the news currently is - reaction-bait with the sole purpose of driving engagement and views to generate ad revenue, instead of actual, unbiased, honest journalism.

[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 12 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Not paying for the news is quite literally how we have found ourselves in this situation. When more were paying for the news they were less dependent on ad dollars and more on subscribers. The shift towards free news with the popularization of the web is what created our problem.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 hours ago

I wouldn't say it was just that. News also got worse on e.g. government supported TV channels in countries that have them. Part of the problem is the regurgitation of social media on the news and also news organizations being afraid of social media backlash. Another part is politicians not giving interviews to organizations that ask them hard questions, that one was probably better in the past because there were more limited numbers of news sources.

[–] Goretantath@lemm.ee -3 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Gatekeeping the news? No ty.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 9 points 7 hours ago

Do you think the news just appears on webpages for us to consume?

Particularly in the case of investigative journalism, there is a skill involved in writing the stories, and it consumes the time and effort of many people.

Charging money for your work is not "gatekeeping." It's how you keep eating.

[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 6 points 7 hours ago

It’s not gatekeeping. You are paying for a service so that it can continue to persist.