> I won't pay 10 dollars a month (each) to the NYT (LAT, WaPo, et al) for a subscription

What about a Spotify model for articles where you pay a monthly subscription to access all articles from the NYT, WaPo, LAT, Guardian, Independent, Telegraph, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, The Economist, Nature, National Geographic, Scientific American, London Review of Books ... ?

EDIT: I guess this is what Blendle is, as mentioned in a sibling comment, except Blendle seems to be pay-per-view and I'm suggesting monthly subscription. Presumably Blendle could also offer monthly subscription.

Note that it does seem to work reasonably well for the "adult" industry. People are often reluctant to pay for recurring fees on those sites (social stigma plays a role there, probably). But "pay-as-you-go" or pay per view schemes seem to fare far better. And, it makes sense; why pay for a monthly thing when the moment of enjoyment is relatively short. A DRM free download for that thing you like is mentally easier to justify. The big hurdle is still sign-up and credit cards I think, I'd personally be much more inclined to use systems with more privacy conscious approaches: since micropayments give an opportunity to track /exactly/ what you're looking at. This might even be more relevant for news outlets that cover a wide range of topics and writing styles.

Saw https://blendle.com/ posted on HN a while back. Works exactly like that.

Blende is great! I have zero problems paying for good reading material but I don’t want to pay 5 $10 subscriptions. Blendle just lets me pay per article.

They are based in the Netherlands, my home country and they have deals with all major newspapers here, so I am not missing out on anything.

I highly recommend you give this a shot.

Note: I am not associated with Blendle in any way. Just a happy user spreading the word.

Not sure if you are Dutch, but if you follow dutch news then you'd known the soap bubble 'blendle' has burst already... Afaics they are at the brink of bankruptcy, and needed multiple financial injections to 'survive' and papers like NRC, FTM and recently the telegraaf have already pulled their publications.

Today the people behind blendle launched a new product, Medianieuwsbrief.nl To me another pointer that blendle is no longer viable and they are looking for new products.

They are what others describe causing brand erosion, as they collect articles from lots of sources, readers will forget/not know who actually wrote the article, which newspaper the good articles come from etc.

I am Dutch. Born and raised. I moved out two years ago though so I am not completely up-to-date with all the recent development.

Jeez. I didn't know the situation became that bad. I didn't notice because I mostly read American news. From what I quickly read on for example NRC [0], they pulled their content because Blendle introduced the concept of a subscription and that would cut profits for NRC.

The new concept Medianieuwsbrief.nl looks like a last resort kinda thing. I doubt it would take off.

[0] https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2017/03/07/waarom-nrc-stopt-met-bl...

Alexander said to be inspired by https://www.mediagazer.com For their new site.

That new site hurts my eyes :)

Does it work as I suspect: you pay, and yet you still get ads too?

No ads in my experience. You should check out the beta and see what you think, I still think it's running. You receive a few dollars in credit to try out the platform. Personally, I really love it.

Nope, I never saw a single ad. You open up the app, pick and article that looks interesting to you and you can start reading. When you click, you pay a small amount, the price for an article is always clearly displayed.

Oh c'mon. I cannot endorse a cool product? They're from my home country, I like their product and I'd like to see people use these kind of services where authors actually get paid instead of through ads.

Hijacks my back button..big no no

Can someone explain to me why hijacking of the back button is even possible? It's obviously something that browsers could fix, and the fact they don't fix it means that there must be some legitimate uses. But what legit use?

In this case I think it doesn't hijack your back button. The first page redirects to a second page, and they both end up in your history. If they used history.replaceState() then you'd only have one entry in your back-stack. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/History_API

In a perfect world, it would be used by single page apps that are driven by JavaScript to provide the same benefits of linking, history navigation, and so on, without having to actually load a new page.

Think an online webmail client, where each time you view an email it adds a new item to your history.

JavaScript apps. If you dynamically load content using js, the user will likely expect the back button to undo that change.

What exactly does it make the back button do that you don't like? It seems to work fine for me.

> it was supposed to be the wave of the future some years ago, but never went anywhere.

I remember when Peter Sunde's Flattr was around (circa 2010) and websites had flattr buttons (like those html/css buttons).

Edit: I just checked and apparently it still exists: https://flattr.com/

Yes it exists, but has been bought by Eyeo. That's the company behind AdBlock Plus, whos' business practices are one of the reasons why so many people have switched to uBlock Origin.

Edit: And it has already started: Eyeo has made major changes to how Flattr works (now they decide who gets your money, and how much of it, not you) and hiked the prices.

I think it is untouched market, since there were many attempts and it didn't work. I call it a "micropayments dream"... publishers dream about it, but it is not going to happen. I personally would not pay 5 cent per article, since I don't want the burden in the back of my mind to evaluate, if that particular article was "worth" 5 cents. Also, if there is a commentary which goes against my opinions, I might want to read it, but not pay for it.

I would totally pay 5 cents just to see if an article is good. I think the price point will vary wildly from person to person. For me, 50 cents is probably where I start getting price sensitive. I would pay 50 cents for a long form article from a publisher known for high quality, and 5 cents for your average news article.

I won't pay 5 cents for something I may not like, but at 1 cent, I may.

One big disincentive (at least for web articles) is that I tend to not know the actual value of the article until after I've read it. I don't want to pay 50 cents for an article, only to read it and realize they just copy-pasted a press release from Intel and did no actual reporting