On social media, every day, we are bombarded with requests to pay for subscriptions to various content providers... dozens, maybe hundreds even... Most of which I completely ignor, as I'm sure do most of you all.
For one thing, most sources aren't worth even the short money they usually ask for... certainly the idiots asking for $20 a month aren't worth a damn... and they're so annoying and there are so many of them, they just become background noise that you just condition yourself to tune out... Or they get annoying enough, you just stop fmvisiting those sites.
I have four exceptions... Or at least I used to... Sort of...
...And if you can afford it, and you're reading me, I think you should maybe have a couple as well...
The "sort of" is a subscription I get free with other subscriptions and products I already have and pay for anyway... the New York Times... because God knows I wouldn't pay them a dime of my own money.
That said, I do read and share a fair bit of their content (along with the Washington Post) being as they are the chief source of content for my social and political opponents.... And frankly shape the thoughts of the left generally to such a significant degree that NOT reading the NYT puts you at a significant disadvantage in trying to understand what the left is thinking and doing, and will be trying to do, and why.
...Oh and the other website I still read and share a lot of content from, but mostly disagree with on an editorial and philosophical basis (they used to be much less left than they have become over the past couple years)and also would never pay for (because in addition to having become lefty shills, they're criminal scammers. They use their "news" pages to try to manipulate markets and make money off them, as ZeroHedge does)...is Business Insider.
I strongly recommend no-one actually trust BI on anything regarding business, economics, or politics, and never give them any money, ever.
That said, I strongly recommend no-one trust ANY source, without independent confirmation... Preferably multiple independent credible and reliable confirming sources, and a lack of credible and reliable contradictory sources... and analyzing those sources against your own knowledge and experience, and your own independent research on the subject, so that you can better understand what is more likely to be true or not be true.
...Be hard to be lied to...
However, on the positive side, Business Insider still has a lot of great contributing writers, their "not deliberate leftist propaganda" stuff can still be great, and they'll often be the first, or only, non-niche specialist website, writing and publishing new content, or analysis, on a lot of odd subjects. Oj, and also make a lot of good video content (it's available on youtube).
The second, is the "used to" be an exception, and that was the Wall Street Journal. I USED to both read and share their content enough that I felt the $8 a month it was costing me was justified.
Recently however, they raised their price, and eliminated the bundles and the discounts and bundles they used to have, that kept my price at $8 a month through my last annual renewal. Unfortunately, it's now $174 a year, or almost $15 a month.
At the same time, both the quantity and the quality of the WSJs online content have diminished, and resultingly, I'm both reading and sharing their content far less. Still a fair bit, but maybe 1/3 of what it was just 2 years ago... certainly less than half.
...So I no longer feel it's a good value.... Which is too bad, as they WERE the single best newspaper in the country, and possibly the world. Frankly... they may still be... Its just the overall state of newspapers has degenerated that much.
That leaves the two website subscriptions I still actually make an exception for, and actually maintain my paid subscriptions... and have for years... And the two that I think many of my readers should also consider pay for, if they can afford it.
Not coincidentally, they're also the two sources I share the most content from, by a significant margin: National Review, and Reason.
I'm a libertarian not a conservative. As such, I probably disagree with about 50% of what National Review publishes...
...And hell, the divisions on the right mean that most people.who identify as conservative probably disagree with about 50% of what they publish, in four different tranches, who all disagree with a DIFFERENT 50%...
...but there is no better source of generally well reasoned, and generally well written, anti-leftist and pro western culture; content on the web. Full stop... And a subscription is less than $4 a month. Not even the price of a cup of coffee these days.
And as I said, I'm a libertarian... Which of course means I also disagree with a lot of what the... by far number one... libertarian website and magazine, Reason, publishes.
...But... and I'm mostly repeating myself here...
...There is no better source of generally well reasoned, and generally well written anti-collectivist, anti-statist, and pro individual liberty content on the web, period full stop. Not only that, but a Reason subscription is even CHEAPER... Its got to be the best value for content of any online magazine I know of... at just $1.35 a month.
Copy pasting from above... I want to support that, and it costs me almost nothing to do so. In fact, given how much benefit I get from reading their content, and how much I share their content, I absolutely feel some genuine sense of obligation to do so.
Combined, those two subscriptions cost me about $5 a month... And deliver dozens of hours of entertainment and intellectual stimulation, and dozens of pieces... maybe hundreds of pieces... that I share every month... and help me spread the arguments for individualism and individual liberties and individual rights, and against collectivism and anti capitalism, and authoritarianism.
...Thats real value to me... I hope it is to you...
.
