still available. Heck you can even set up old school forums like this one.

Maybe Krugman should consider affiliating with a site like Talkingpointsmemo. I'm sure Josh Marshall would love to host him.

A cost, not a benefit.

for a domain name or server.

That's not the point. It's the principle surrounding the elimination of a long standing relationship. It's not about the money.

getting his message out or he wouldn't have gone to substance. I doubt at his age he needs the money from a regular column.

There are ways to reach a greater audience than a substack blog or even the NYT op ed page is all I pointed out.

They do not represent journalism. They do not seek out truth or government corruption. They are in business to make money. Period.

They are in the business of selling advertising. Just like broadcast news, these businesses are beholden to their stockholders and owners. Since those interests represent upper-income earners, I.e., the upper 5%, their publications/broadcasts reflect the interests of the outlets’ owners.

Journalism is dead in America. The only reliable sources of news and facts are found online. Unfortunately, most citizens don’t do their due diligence in comprehending current events. That’s why we end up with Trump, W, Reagan, etc.

journalism in the USA is dead.

the top 5%. Those 5% are only going to buy so many newspapers compared to the rest.
Stockholders and owners are another thing. I don't recall stockholders being a problem at WaPo when Woodward and Bernstein became famous. What mattered was not the politics of the stockholders but whether the story proved to be true, and therefore worth reading.

The difference to my mind is the owner.
Neither then or now does the owner need the income from the paper. WaPo is insignificant in Bezos holdings.
It is ultimately about what Bezos thinks he can gain from cow-towing to Trump, separate from the actual finances of the paper.
It's less about the finances of the newspaper business and more about oligarchy.

I know less about NYT but I suspect oligarchy is at play here. Less blatant because there has been a mix of results from NYT, but definitely moving in the direction of afraid to speak to power.

MSM propaganda is just the cost of doing business. It's really NOT about informing the public, but rather a means of social control.
Any truthful information conveyed must not be harmful to the main goal (controlling public opinion and framing the issues).
People talking about "advertising $" don't fully understand the motivations involved.

That's when the old-style editors and reporters started getting the boot. I think it happened in TV news first, but newspaper publishing was quick to follow. Just as you say, investigative journalism is never their goal. All they care about are profits and bonuses to the sales department execs.

If Nixon had been president in the 1980's, the Woodward and Bernstein story about the Watergate break-in would have never made it to print.

Original:

clearing cookies periodically from CNN, Reuters, Raw Story, Daily Beast, Fortune, and a few others. These will usually allow a couple "free" views before the paywall gets thrown up. I can sometimes find their stories through aggregators like Yahoo!, msn, Aol, etc.

(recently did a full sub to The Guardian) so since I don't use this site as much as I use others, I haven't yet bothered.

to get articles behind a paywall. First thing you gotta do is grab the URL of the page you want. Paste it into the lower search, the article may already be archived…chose the latest date and begin to read or copy the archive URL and share…paywall removed.
The top search finds and archives the article for future use by you or others.

https://archive.ph/

so it's not worth it for me.

... by putting it behind a paywall for a price I'm not willing to pay, or by plastering their web sites with advertising I find obnoxious, then I simply don't read their stuff.

I pay so I can read sites like DU and The Guardian without advertising. There are other sites I regularly visit, mostly technical sites, that are supported by unobtrusive advertising from the technical industries they represent. I don't block those ads.

In a gray area, there are a few sites I occasionally visit where I've found it easy enough to block the sorts of advertising I find most annoying, leaving the rest of their advertising intact.

If I'm just following links to sites I rarely visit, like many links posted here on DU, my ad blocking privacy software is set to full strength.

I don't watch any advertising supported television at all.

Tunneling through paywalls isn't the kind of freedom I'm fighting for.

I've used it for years. You can customize how it cleans, too. I use two browsers, Chrome for some stuff & Opera for other stuff. I have it set up so every time I close Chrome it gets a thorough cleaning but Opera only gets a partial cleaning at night & I have to do that one manually. So financial sites I visit on Chrome & social sites I visit on Opera. It has some other great drive/OS tools too, like checking for & updating outdated drivers & apps & doing some registry cleanup. I have the professional version which gave me three licenses so I have it on my desktop, laptop, & Android phone. I really like it. It's called CCleaner & I don't work for them.

because I have a bunch of subs (some of which like Conde Nast stuff and now even Disney, which owns National Geographic) cross link between their magazines/other content. And since some even make me change PWs every "x" months, it can become a nightmare. I currently use Firefox on my laptop and various browsers on my phone(s) and iPad(s).

I have heard of the tool you are talking about though! I think I was using it back in the day on my old Samsung S4 (now they are up to the S25 )!

They're not a publication of record.
The original story is out there instead of going through a wannabe periodical.
Thanks for posting the link to the original story.

but what happens is that the articles that they are referencing have often ended up outside of LBN's 12-hour criteria (and weren't "featured" and viewable on their websites at the claimed publication time), so I try to find sites that will reference those stories - at least with a summary, particularly when they are seemingly important, but got buried under other bullshit at the originator site.

If the story is that important, I've seen them elevated coming out of General Discussion.

Thanks for the post.

many of the "original source" articles end up outside of the LBN 12-hour criteria and I am trying to encourage people to post NEWS in LBN! So much news gets lost in General Discussion because of all the other types of threads that are posted there.

Each forum has 30 pages with 80 threads per page (which is 2400 OPs) and GD only goes back to a week's worth of threads, so it moves fast.

Is in in a forum like FB or X?

hahaha
Betraying my age.

has an all star line up of contributors both liberal and conservative. It is headed by Norm Eisen and Jennifer Rubin.

Corporate McPravda serves NAZI gangsters.

Thanks, Putin.

The only "tight editorial control" I noticed during the campaign was the NYT's non-stop trashing of Democrats and the daily blow-jobbing of the trump candidacy. Unforgivable behavior, from what used to be a beacon of liberal advocacy---just days into the trump regime, and our democracy is already hanging by a thread. Lose Paul Krugman, keep Ross Douthat---thanks for nothing, NYT.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 accelerated media concentration and cross ownership, ensuring that media outlets from local papers to cable networks to AM and FM radio became part of ever larger conglomerates, ever more beholden to the lords of Wall Street.

Yes, there has always been a profit motive in media, but the profit motive faced by medium sized and regional corporations doesn’t hold a candle to today’s shareholder activism that only cares about constant and accelerating growth.

It’s the enshittification of the American economy, media version. Add that to the President’s politics of revenge and you get media companies only too happy to comply with the official story the White House wants told. PRAVDA ain’t got nothing on the Times and the Post these days…

https://billmoyers.com/story/twenty-years-of-media-consolidation-has-not-been-good-for-our-democracy/

Journalism died in the 1980's.