this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2023
117 points (89.8% liked)

United Kingdom

4338 readers
147 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] soyagi@yiffit.net 19 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Just use the website; there are annoying pop-ups asking you to subscribe, but they don't limit how many articles you can read.

[–] starlinguk@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago

I used to subscribe, but I still got the annoying pop ups so I unsubscribed.

[–] galmuth@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago

I uninstalled the app last month and use the website instead too. I put a shortcut on my homescreen so there's barely a difference.

[–] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Worth it tbh.

The only thing I object to is having to sign in. Even with lemmy, if I could stay fully anonymous, I would.

But the Guardian tends to do responsible reporting, which is vanishingly rare.

[–] lemonflavoured@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Their opinion pieces and lifestyle sections are a bit crap though.

[–] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

That's the truth, but that tends to be true of any newspaper type news service now (and has been true of lifestyle sections going back as long as I've been alive lol).

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 2 years ago

Sometimes the lifestyle stuff is quite funny. Wasn't the one guy at one point who was documenting his war with a squirrel?

[–] DavidGA@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A headline with "quietly" in it is guaranteed to be clickbait.

"Quietly" means "They told everyone but we want you to be more outraged."

[–] starlinguk@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Get Pressreader. Your local library probably has a membership. It has the Guardian for free.

[–] galmuth@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago

Ooh,. Is pressreader any good? Do you just get a PDF-ish version of the print edition which you have to try and zoom and swipe around to navigate and read, or is it a bit easier to use than that?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Quietly?

I'm not sure how quiet it is if it's a image that covers the screen.

Perhaps a better title would have been "The Guardian website has a paywall."

[–] butterflyattack@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Yeah, I read it in a browser. It started restricting my access to compete articles so I had a think and decided I'd pay for it. I don't read it loads and I'm not rich so I pay IIRC £2 a month. Problem solved. Real journalism seems to be having a hard time these days, and I can see why - back in the days before everything was online I would buy a physical newspaper every day. So news media have lost the income from all those people like me who stopped buying newspapers, they've got to make it up through advertising or through a pay-for-content model.

I don't like paywalls because I don't like the idea that information should be restricted to those who can afford to buy it. But TBF that was the way it was back when you had to physically purchase a newspaper. The alternative is a load of intrusive advertising. Or articles written cheaply by chatGPT or whatever. Money to pay the wages for journalists to research and write articles has to come from somewhere.

[–] z3n0x@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago

Oh no! Anyway …

[–] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago

The guardian seems to be losing money like a sieve.

[–] e-ratic@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago
[–] HipPriest@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago
[–] Alien_Mortice@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Try this . It’s supposed to get you past paywalls.

[–] DavidGA@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Damn, just give them some money. Journalism is important.

[–] MrZee@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Cool, thanks!

I just tested it on NYT and it is disabled for that site :(. But I’ll bet it’ll come in handy elsewhere.

[–] Alien_Mortice@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago
[–] DM_Me_Boobs@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

https://www.shacklefree.in/ Enter the website into this paywall remover and you will be able to browse. Changing your IP (switching vpn server) should also give you a new "set" of articles to read.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk -1 points 2 years ago

Or you could just pay for quality journalism. Otherwise the likes of the Sun win and the entire industry of journalism will just descend into propaganda pieces and ex MPs pushing whatever particular agenda they're being paid to push today.