you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 30 points 9 months ago (5 children)

I get that the NY Times and others want to have subscribers, but it seems reports of this sort serve the public interest and should be available without a paywall/login.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    I think we shouldn't need for-profit news sources to provide us with factual information, but if public interest reports are free, what news can't be argued to be public interest? And would anyone want to pay solely to access those fringe stories?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 9 months ago* (2 children)

    That's a good argument. I would say election results, not the commentary/analysis should be freely available. It says at the bottom of the graphic that the results are from the AP. Perhaps there's some extra value analysis included in the NY Times article.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments