I like to read the morning paper, but it got too expensive so we cancelled it. It was also getting thinner and thinner. They bundle the price with their digital access, but we never used that and there's no way to get the price down under $45/month or so. Even cutting the weekly and just getting Sunday delivery doesn't help much, so I just go to the store and buy the thing for $3 on Sunday morning. No TV magazine and no digital access. TV listings online are actually better. IMO, their business model has something seriously wrong with it. There isn't much actual reporting and with all the ads, the thing should be free.
Conrad, I think your premise that local papers are swimming in ad revenue is largely wrong. Brick and mortar advertisers are being squeezed by the Amazons of the world, and they in turn buy less print advertising. I spend about $16.00 a month on news, which is very reasonable. I'd spend more to subscribe to the local paper if it was any good. You can't fight the big trends, whether good or bad. Newspapers, especially small town locals, are dying.
I'm 63, and at one time subscribed to a local, a regional, and a national newspaper. When I was on the road more, I would always buy the local paper first thing on getting to a new town. I no longer subscribe to a single print publication - newspaper or periodical. I get almost all of my news online. Here and there a little NPR radio, and lately my schedule is such that I can catch the CBS evening news on TV.
It is local news that's being hurt by current trends. Our local newspaper (a county with a population of a little over 100,000) was independent and owned by two local families when I was a kid. It has since been owned by a succession of chains, the latest being Gannett, which is USA Today. It is a pathetic shell of its old self, printed 40 miles away at another paper's plant, and trucked in like a load of drywall. The veteran staff has all been canned, the last one,
no kidding, yesterday. They get by with young reporters who are really just glorified stringers. Local news that used to be its heart and soul - city council, school board, crime blotter, municipal politics, charities and non-profits, local kids in college and the service - is almost gone. Instead we get insipid features and wire stuff on the front page. Forget about anything investigative that requires time and sustained effort.
The regional paper has gone to three days a week in print. It's still pretty good, probably because it's in the state capital. But when they run obits once a week, you'd think that the whole region is dropping dead at once. I read their still free online edition daily.
For national news, I have an online subscription to the Washington Post, $9.99 a month, which is very reasonable. Ironically, the WaPo is owned by Jeff Bezos, who, through Amazon, is responsible for the squeeze on brick and mortar businesses and in turn on local papers' ad revenue.
For world news, I rely on a variety of online sources: BBC (free) and Guardian ($5.83/mo., but it's free if you prefer) primarily.
I also irregularly read a bunch of free online sites: UPI, AP, Reuters, Vice, Deutsche Welle, Al Jazeera, etc.
It's local news that has been hurt the most by the emergence of digital. National and international news is as good as ever, and actually easier to get at in the digital age. EDIT: And it's way easier than ever to find a wide range of opinion and editorial views, if you want to avoid the echo chamber.
As far as periodicals, there are tons of good ones online, all along the left-right spectrum if you like politics: New Republic, American Conservative, Reason, The Intercept, Mother Jones, Vice, and tons more. If you really like one, you can subscribe and support it. Or not.