You know how it is. You’re reading an article online with links to an article in, say, the Washington Post. You click on it, and within seconds the text disappears and the selling begins. In those seconds, however, you have seen the name of the article. Suppose the article was entitled “Chickens who smoke get lung cancer”
So what you do is a Google search including “Washinton Post” and “Chickens who smoke get lung cancer” and Voila!! up comes the article.
I have a theory that Google doesn’t like to include paywalls search results, or at least it seems that way.
How long did it take you to come up with that scheme?
I’ve used that technique, in a variety of contexts, for some time now. Basically, there seem to be a variety of situations where you see an intriguing headline, and click on it, and for one annoying reason or another you don’t get the page with the article.
I just cut-and-paste the headline (or hand-type it if necessary) into a google search and Voila!! – Now to be sure, one may or may not find that particular article, but one may very well find any number of articles covering the same topic.
After paywalls were first implemented for various newspaper sites, I remember reading that they made sure if you link to it from certain places it will let you read free. I think that was for Facebook and Twitter direct links, and maybe Google News too.
I don’t know who has done it, and what their particular rules are, but it is deliberate to get a lot of eyes on an article that is linked in good faith.
Mike used to smoke. Of course, his owner had to hold the cigarette for him . . . but that was how they’d prove to the audience that he was breathing. I don’t think it was lung cancer that killed him though.
I don’t recall; I have been using it for awhile. I think I realized that Google didn’t want to be a position of sending people to paywalls. I speculate that people who set up paywalls know that and make provisions for that.
Yes, this often works. Another technique which sometimes works is to get a browser add-on which toggles Javascript. You push the button to disable Javascript and it no longer runs the script asking you to subscribe.
Funny you should mention this. Literally right before I came to the Dope to have a browse, I had just figured out how to read more than 10 free articles at The New York Times. Click on article link and quickly (before the “you have used all your free articles” message comes up), go Crtl+A to select everything, Ctrl+C to copy it and paste into a Word doc. One free completely readable article!
I don’t read many NY Times or WashPost articles a month. But midway thru I go to my browser’s setting page and clear out their cookies and their persistent storage.
The private tab idea seems pretty good for the one-off sort of thing. Thanks for that idea.
If I find that I often encounter the paywall in a given publication (because I find their articles worthwhile and interesting), I go around the paywall in my own way: I buy a subscription.
Some sites have caught on to this. The Portland Press Herald now shows a message asking readers to subscribe if they use incognito windows, and will not allow articles to be read in one.
Maybe it’s secondhand smoke, although I’ve heard tell a few years ago of some studies that are said to show that the hazards of exposure to secondhand smoke have been exaggerated. That might not hold true for chickens, though.
I always find it amusing when the pop up shows up, but you can still scroll through the article. Sure, it’s annoying to only be able to read a few lines at a time, but if you’re that interested, you can usually get through it.
Tell that to the forbes . com pages it keeps sending me to.
