Apple News+ stumbled because it’s the service most outside Apple’s control

Apple News+ subscribers gain access to over 150 publications that meet any interest.
Apple News+ subscribers gain access to over 150 publications that meet any interest.

“Apple’s subscription-based news service is its only real stumble in its services push — and that’s not entirely its fault,” Leif Johnson writes for Macworld:

Without exception, Apple Music, Apple TV+, and Apple Arcade are all now firmly part of The Conversation. But Apple News+? Hardly. Indeed, the most damning thing about it is that no one seems interested in talking about it at all — not even in the form of random Apple-bashing in the Android subreddit. When we do hear about Apple News+, it’s usually in the form of tepid statements like that from Condé Nast CEO Roger Lynch last week (via Variety), when he said the “jury is still out” on the service. CNBC also dropped a report last week saying that Apple has struggled to gain more than 200,000 subscribers in the months since launch.

Most of Apple’s seeming trouble with Apple News+ may spring from the fact that it’s the only one of Apple’s large paid services that’s mainly out of its direct control…

MacDailyNews Take: Eh, they can’t all be winners.


          1. Kent, is the best the best insult you can muster? English not your first language?
            Clearly another low IQ narrow forehead narrow-minded knuckle-dragging Dumbass Donald defender.

  1. No one respects the “news” these days, even when you put “Apple” in front of it. Journalism is dead… The word “news” is why it stumbles.

    Apple TV+ is about video content. Apple Music is for music lovers. Apple Arcade is for gamers. So Apple News+ should be refocused on its type of content. It’s for readers. And Apple has a previous existing service for readers… Apple Books (formerly iBooks). Make news a part of Apple Books, and roll out a subscription service (with a “+”) for people who love to read.

  2. ‘Most of Apple’s seeming trouble with Apple News+ may spring from the fact that it’s the only one of Apple’s large paid services that’s mainly out of its direct control…’

    this is going to sound a bit political, not that i want it to but, it will, so, here goes: not that apple would want to, and not to impugn their praiseworthy and principled inner goodness but, if apple wanted, for whatever motivation, to control or shape and craft the news, that is, apple’s subscription-based news service, which would be totally unethical, then, they’re going to need more democrats. 🙂

    1. Me, too. I find the occasional reminder that I can get additional content from Apple News+ annoying, not at all compelling. The content behind the paywall has to be compelling. I pay $5 a month to subscribe to Medium. I don’t know how many subscribers they have, but I’d venture a guess that it’s well over 200,000, given that they have about 60 million readers a month and if you don’t pay, you only get three articles a month.

  3. Despite the perpetual trolls, many people do not trust the news because unless your amazingly blind, its obvious that the news slants towards the left and not right.. And all it takes is an honest assessment, look at the places where the left has free reign, California, New York, taxes are through the roof, once great cities are cess pools, uncontrolled illegal immigration, the list of fails is long.. and a lot of the media protect and promote this foolishness,

    So why pay to read news and other media that a lot of people don’t agree with… not to mention, you can read much the lame news somewhere for free.

  4. I use it. Like most things you have to learn how to use it. I’ve gotten rid of most of the useless stuff and offensive media. I get mainstream stuff from WSJ, FOX, Washington Times, a smattering of tech magazines, and a ton of tech and Apple related news sources. So basically I don’t see that George Clooney hates Donald Trump first thing in the morning, nor do I see some bimbo actress who thinks black conservatives are mentally ill, and on and on and on. It makes the news pleasing and fun to look at. Takes a while to block all the channels you dislike. After that it works well enough. Should be free though.

    1. I agree that anybody who is offended by content on News+ can easily avoid it. I am curious, though, as to how any of these publications could survive if they were free. Your thoughts?

    2. I have only two suggestions to improve Apple News.
      1: As much as I appreciate independent thought and commentary, I want to see any piece picked up by Apple News that is written by a columnist or is opinionated to be placed under a heading of “Opinion” or “Commentary”. Letters to the Editor and the writings of columnists are not News.
      In Canada, the National Post provide the name of the columnist in the article header. The various “xxxxxx. Sun” newspaper articles are rarely purely news without opinionated bias.
      2: Allow me to follow/unfollow specific news sources rather than broad subject matter.

      Apple News provides me with a fairly broad base of information and news. I continue to use at least 2 sources that provide me with more solid reportage – CBCNews and BBC.

  5. On its surface, 9.99 a month for Mag news isn’t really an interesting deal for the type of content. If Apple wants the service to POP, it needs to bundle it something more interesting.

    Now, if you bundle Apple TV + and Apple News + for 9.99 a month…that would be much more interesting…

  6. Add some constitutional and conservative news sites and they just might get the attention of a large majority of the population. I don’t need 20 versions of the same left wing talking points.

  7. Reading news these days is a game for me. The name of the game is: guess the bias. Usually the author betrays his or her bias in the first 2-3 sentences. Sometimes even in the title. The choice of vocabulary usually unmasks the agenda pretty quickly. The most skilled journalists, who are able to hide their bias, keep me reading the longest because I keep searching for the words which would reveal what they are trying to obscure. The true masters can do this: under the guise of unbiased journalism let the reader decide what to think but present it in a way that promotes seeding an opinion & implanting an idea.
    Diverging slightly to different medium: Hollywood succeeded in implanting ideas through entertainment and the viewers are adapting the way of thinking and morality of the people in show/film biz (have I just betrayed my bias?)

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.