The New York Times decided to withdraw from Apple News, arduous news aggregation platform

Why has the press gradually abandoned the news aggregation platform?

Last week, in the world press world stood out when the New York Times announced that it would stop working with Apple News. The newspaper said Apple News rarely provided a direct relationship with its readers and had little control over business operations.

Instead of continuing to collaborate, the New York Times hopes to have more readers direct to its own websites and mobile apps, which in turn adds support for quality journalism. Their total number of paid readership subscribers now exceeds 6 million.

Apple created the Apple News news platform in late 2015. The ability to introduce Apple News on the iPhone has brought about 125 million monthly readership, making it one of the most read sources. In the world.

But advertising in Apple News is considered to generate relatively low revenue for news agencies. For any subscription subscription arising from the application, Apple cuts 30%.

Last year, Apple launched the Apple News Plus platform, a subscription service for $ 9.99 per month to read hundreds of publications. But the New York Times declined the invitation to join.

Not only that, in an interview with Reuters last year, Mark Thompson, CEO of the New York Times also warned other press agencies about the risks of working with Apple.

“We are quite skeptical of the idea of ​​creating a habit for people to find our journalism somewhere else,” he said.

Apple earns half of its $ 9.99 monthly subscription fee, “the rest will be divided among the participating newspapers based on how long you spend reading the article,” the media association’s website FIPP share.

At a glance, everyone will pay less for newspapers in this partnership. For example, the Wall Street Journal charges $ 39 per month on its own platform.

After the New York Times announced the termination of cooperation with Apple News, it can be seen that the news aggregation platforms have revealed many restrictions after a few years of operation.

The New York Times had to stop working with Facebook’s Instant Articles platform in 2017 and insisted it was not a sufficient revenue source.

Not only the New York Times, according to the Columbia Journalism Review in early 2018, many newspapers are not very dependent on Facebook’s fast news aggregation platform.

Of the 72 newspapers that have partnered with Facebook since the launch of Instant Articles in 2015, 38 have not published an article as of January 17, 2018. Thus, more than 50% of early partners abandoned this platform.

The three main reasons drawn include limited ability to earn revenue, little control of advertising and a lack of data on readers on the platform.

There will be new directions more appropriate?

Since last year, Facebook had to pay for the New York Times and some top newspapers to put articles on the news tab on the Facebook app. Some leading newspapers include the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, as well as news websites like BuzzFeed or Business Insider.

“We feel deeply responsible, because we can clearly recognize that the Internet has broken the traditional business model of the press,” Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in an interview.

However, so far it is not clear whether Facebook News will work effectively, this service has not been extended to the United States.

New York Times articles are also appearing on Google News, the platform that takes readers to the newspaper’s website, unlike Apple News or similar platforms.

According to the New York Times, Business Insider