357
X appears to throttle New York Times
(www.semafor.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
357 points (97.6% liked)
Technology
55929 readers
2936 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That’s you and me. That doesn’t apply to most people. I have rss feeds to follow what interests me. But Twitter for a lot of people is just that, a glorified rss reader. They follow some people, some news outlets and that’s it. The number of people who visit NYT organically is, in my assumption, less than 100k. I genuinely believe that services like Google News, Meta & Twitter is where NYT gets most of their clicks from.
The NYT has 8.6 million digital-only subscribers. Where's that "100k" coming from ?
I seriously doubt your numbers. Granted, I'm older, but I subscribe to NYT and go there almost daily to read the headlines, a few stories, and a couple games. I hit a few others nearly daily as well for different takes. About 20 years ago, I used Google News, but I switched a long time ago to direct paper access because I didn't want to be fed only what I want to hear. I want a more holistic news diet.
Ditto. I was sick of sensationalism and click bait trash. Their research articles are also really well done and intelligent. I subscribe so I at least have one decent source without the mental burden of constantly having to sort fact from fiction.