You have 2 free articles remaining. Subscribe for unlimited access

Attached: 1421897362875.jpg (1106x553, 46K)

>*clears cookies*
your move

you know the whole reason journalism has gotten so shit in the last 5 years is because people like you block all their ads and they can't afford to do anything but clickbaity yellow journalism anymore
this is your own fault

or its an oversaturated field that cant support itself

if you cant survive without instrusive ads your job isn't journalism, it's professional ad baiting

T. Fake news media.

The reason no one supports news sites and even refuse to allow ads is because of how fucking shitty journalists have become. Journalists used to have integrity, be honest and truthful in their reporting, with no biases. Now they treat journalism like social media, aren't objective, they tell you what to believe instead of reporting on the facts, and are highly fucking biased when it comes to political articles. I will never support any news site, and go out of my way to make sure they don't get extra views, or ad revenue. They have no one to blame but themselves.

That's completely wrong.
The news companies these days have little to no breaking news that I cant get elsewhere and their opinion and analysis are completely biased in either direction
You can get some crap from the Murdoch press or some other crap from the wapo/but/huffpo etc.

The truth is most of the time the "official" news media is slow in reporting sometimes by 2-3 days and they never give you the full story. Just some Reuters rerun and some shit flavour of the week "opinion" by the nearest moron

this happened precisely because you dont support them in any way
the only thing that brings in revenue is garbage yellow journalism and clickbait "AND THAT'S A GOOD THING" headlines.

>they have the right to get paid for garbage articles
topkek

they also have a right to block you from their website if they feel you're a net drain on their business model

>blocking users does not lead to net drain on their business model
topkek

Why would I want to pay for some gender non binary millenial with dyed hair forcing their opinions on me? Get a real job.

>he doesn't have paywall bypassing scripts installed
>he's too fucking dumb to even open it in a private tab to bypass the normie way

Stupid dumb frogposting scum

dumb meanposter

Someone has to teach the retards that still post poopy the frog in 2018 how to use the internet correctly. I'm practically spoonfeeding the shithead, there's not much room for him to complain.

quads of truth

it's ok you can say nytimes

Bloomberg is putting up one too

So just let the journalism industry die then? Have fun with your literal fake news and anecdata.

Lmao. Just stop. You keep digging your own hole.

It's already fake and gay

Journalism is outdated concept

>journalism has gotten so shit
journalism has ALWAYS been shit

>Media carries with it a credibility that is totally undeserved. You have all experienced this, in what I call the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. (I call it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.)

>Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect works as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.

>In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story-and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read with renewed interest as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about far-off Palestine than it was about the story you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.

>That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I’d point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all.

>But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn’t. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.

> opens links in incognito tab
> keeps browsing
Why must we suffer such ineptitude on a technology board?

Okay then, let's look at a market where the majority never used Adblock!
The mobile market...
>Insanely slow loading and navigation even on flagship devices
>Flashing and popping anywhere
>Overlays where the X button opens up the ad
>Overlays that load minutes after you opened the page (on purpose of course)
>Ads with an image of a hair so you accidentally click on them
And my favorite
>Redirects you to an ad page that make you phone vibrate and do high pitch noises

Attached: IMG_20180507_173656.jpg (480x640, 41K)