Discuss this change here!
This announcement will be deleted within one week.
I think an alternative is to copy and paste the content in the body, since Lemmy allows both url and text body.
Yeah, I mean a lot of news sites are putting up paywalls. I’d rather a rule that paywall sites are not allowed w/o including a copy paste of the article content.
Added!
That would disqualify a lot of the better quality sources and promote low quality clickbait.
I’d much prefer either a paywall bypass, such as archive, in the body or comments. Alternatively a copy of the full text / high quality summary needs to be provided. The rules as provided would for instance disqualify reuters and several investigative journalist papers.
I also think posters who use a non standard source (ie not the well known reuters/ap/bbc/cnn/aljazeera etc) should mention in the text the reach and slant of the source.
I also think posters who use a non standard source (ie not the well known reuters/ap/bbc/cnn/aljazeera etc) should mention in the text the reach and slant of the source.
Eventually I plan on introducing a bot to do this automatically.
I agree. I hate clicking on something only to find it’s behind a paywall but someone usually summarizes or provides the entire article in the comments. At least that way you have access to information coming out of those high quality subscription sources, instead of getting all our news off free sites with a clickbait title and 2 sentences with grammatical errors for the body.
Question: do we think free news is of equal quality to the big outlets (which are often paywalled) ?
researching real stories and not just parroting propaganda for billionaires has costs. Requiring a copy/paste of the article sort of gives you the best of both worlds.
I think it’s a matter of personal preference.
I prefer public organisations.
such as? even some public organizations are billionaire funded these days
mm, true. I suppose a better explanation are media organisations that have extensive transparency.
How does free articles relate to transparency? It just means their funding scheme isn’t people paying for articles. If anything that makes it more likely they need to rely on less transparent funding.
Transparent as in you can see their inner workings and what standards they hold themselves accountable to. Free articles doesn’t equal quality
I guess since you’re aren’t being specific we will all see for ourselves what kind of impact this has. It doesn’t sound like you are looking for feedback.
edit: nvm looks like you changed it, thanks
no problem dood. Servers are slow at the moment, so edits and such take time to update!
deleted by creator
Bad rule. Paywalls are mostly trivial to bypass. Maybe better to encourage people to send archive.is or 12ft.io links in the comments (see hackernews)
If you use Firefox, you can also activate the reading view (a button next to the favourite/bookmark button). I can read paywall articles without a paywall.
Or you can maybe use a RSS Feed too.
doesn’t work for me 3:
Do you have an example of this working? A different user posted one of these, but it didn’t work
Here’s an article on smh.com.au (aussie news site) and here’s the article on 12ft.io with the paywall removed.
SMH lets you view 4-5 articles a month and then it becomes an annoying paywall. Using something like 12ft seems to get rid of it and also strips out the advertising and bloat, giving you a nice article
I also agree with the others, not allowed without a copy and paste.
What about linking to an archive that bypasses the paywall?
I think we should direct people to plugins that block paywalls instead, like https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome
Love it, can’t stand clicking a link to a paywall
