Hacker News Reader

Comment by thgaway17 | Hacker News Reader

Not paying the bill worked for me.

Haha yes! Right around the time I decided I didn't want the sub anymore was luckily right around when I cancelled (for unrelated reasons) the credit card they had on file. Super easy!

My credit card expired and they sent my account to collections. I still subscribe because I like the work their journalists do, but when I read an article about how they're dying I don't really feel bad for them.

(I am also tempted to cancel my Wall Street Journal subscription when I accidentally read an opinion column. Not sure why real journalists let partisan hacks put their opinion columns right next to their real work. Strange business model!)

I canceled WSJ a little while ago and it was a total nightmare. Had to call a number, got put on hold for about 45 minutes, then had to answer a bunch of questions and deal with an aggressive sales pitch. Never subscribing again because of that. I'm sticking with Washington Post for now because it's a lot cheaper, has better politics coverage, and the cancelation process is more reasonable (I think, haven't had to do it yet).

When the WSJ rep asked me why I was canceling, one of the reasons I gave was how bad the op-ed section is. A little while ago the news room writers actually put together an open letter complaining about the lack of accuracy in the op-ed section, and also asking for the labeling on the op-eds to be more clear, because it was affecting the news rooms' credibility.

My plan was just to change my address to California, where they have an online cancellation option that's apparently required by law.

How is that not fraudulent? Obviously they're not giving you online access anymore or sending you papers once your card gets declined for a month-to-month subscription.

No, I resubscribed. They made a mistake by aggressively collecting on an open account.

NYT just lets the partisan hacks write the articles.

Can you show me some examples? I subscribe to both the NYT and the WSJ to act as a check and balance on each other. But the actual news is pretty much exactly identical. The reporting choices on big stories are about the same, with the NYT throwing in some more human interest stories while the WSJ gets into business nuts and bolts. (Following the whole Gamestop thing was much easier on the WSJ, for example.)

Both newspaper's opinion sections are complete garbage. I tend to agree with the NYT's opinion columnists more than the WSJ's, but I wouldn't say the pieces are well-reasoned, that they try to explain both sides of the issue, etc. It's basically long-form Twitter, which I would pay extra to opt out of.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com