And especially the newspapers already dropped their content quality decades ago before things like Apple News or the Kindle even existed.
Yet again, Apple leads the market into digital feudalism, and their fanboys are happy to lead the charge.
I subscribe to Apple News and the $120 / year is far, far more than I was spending on magazine subscriptions in the past.
I guess it does say a lot about the state of the press if people conflate the two so easily, though.
The point is that because of service X, business Y gets more money from me than they would otherwise. How typical am I of service X subscribers? As a group, are rights holders getting more money from us or less?
Several months ago all of the newspapers I was reading through it stopped updating, or slowed down to one or two stories a day. Over the next week or two they slowly improved and got back to normal.
But then it happened again. And this time they haven't fixed it. The Seattle Times newest stories are 15 weeks old now.
The San Jose Mercury News "Top Stories" section at the moment has stories with ages 1x1d, 2x1w, 1x2w, 1x3w, 1x4w, 1x6w, 2x8w, 2x9w, 1x12w, 1x14w, and so on.
It was similar for the Los Angeles Times and the Wall Street Journal when I cancelled. I don't know if they have been fixed or not since they are only in News+. The Seattle Times and the Mercury News are in regular News so I'm able to check them to see if they are fixed.