Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
By-pass WSJ Pay-wall
Old 07-12-2015, 09:15 AM   #1
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RonBoyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 5,280
By-pass WSJ Pay-wall

This article is on a off-topic (although interesting) subject but it does have this insight into Google/Client relationships:

https://proteinpower.com/drmike/2015...des%2C+M.D.%29

Interestingly, I knew this but didn't understand how to accomplish it.

Quote:
Before we get into the fat of the editorial, so to speak, let me take a little side trip to show you a way you can skirt the paywall of the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) and read anything written without having to pay for it. The WSJ, like many online news sources, makes money from advertising. The paper also makes money from subscriptions. In order to maximize its ad revenue, the WSJ articles have to rank high in Google, but if an article resides behind a firewall Google canít breach, then Google doesnít know it exists and isnít able to use it to calculate the ranking of the paper. Which suspends the WSJ on the horns of a dilemma. Do they give the articles away free, get a higher Google rating, and lose the subscription fees, or do they keep the subscription income and suffer in their Google rankings, which means less ad money? The way the WSJ has solved the problem is by making the all the articles available to the Google search engines while at the same time making them unavailable to anyone who is on the WSJ site and tries to read the full article.

Which gives you the ability to read anything you want in the WSJ by simply Googling the Wall Street Journal and the exact name of the article you want to read.
For example, if you wanted to read the editorial above, you would simply go to Google and enter these words into the search window: wall street journal trans fats transphobia

If you go that, youíll be taken to the full text version. Give it a try. Then try going through the WSJ site linked here. When you do, youíll get a message telling you you need to subscribe to read the rest of the article.
And this additional tidbit (I used to love using this but got so much flack I had to stop):

Quote:
Iíve gone ahead and Googled it for you using the Let Me Google That For You function, which I use when Iím feeling particularly smart assed and someone has asked me a question he/she could just as easily Googled. Itís a great little way to harmlessly annoy friends and family or anyone else who asks you to spend your time Googling something they themselves could have done. Makes the point.

Iím not doing this to annoy you, however, it just makes it an easy way for me to link to the editorial above. It will be the first one on the list that comes up when the LMGTFY function does its work. And here is
a little video showing how to use the LMGTFY function should you decide you want to use it yourself.
__________________

__________________
"It's tough to make predictions, especially when it involves the future." ~Attributed to many
"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is." ~(perhaps by) Yogi Berra
"Those who have knowledge, don't predict. Those who predict, don't have knowledge."~ Lau tzu
RonBoyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 07-12-2015, 12:59 PM   #2
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,260
Thanks, I've done that a few times, and always feel guilty (and have not done it because of that a few times). But it seems that the WSJ is essentially condoning/accepting this, so I won't let it bother me.

Is there a less snarky version of the LMGTFY? I love it, but there are times where it would be better to drop the "Was that so hard?" line. But it is funny, and some people really deserve it.

-ERD50
__________________

__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2015, 07:56 PM   #3
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
braumeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Northern Kentucky
Posts: 8,585
I have a feeling the WSJ will eliminate this loophole before too much longer.

It's not an issue for me, because I subscribe. The first two things I do nearly every morning, after getting a cup of coffee, is to read first the local newspaper, then the WSJ on my iPad. I've been reading it every day for over 40 years, so it's an important part of my life.
__________________
braumeister is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2015, 08:48 PM   #4
Recycles dryer sheets
Greencheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 261
I've done this with several sites and works like a charm everytime
__________________
Greencheese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2015, 09:35 PM   #5
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
audreyh1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rio Grande Valley
Posts: 16,455
I think I stumbled onto this myself before and learned to search for the article title.
__________________
Well, I thought I was retired. But it seems that now I'm working as a travel agent instead!
audreyh1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2015, 05:12 AM   #6
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
bUU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Is there a less snarky version of the LMGTFY?
Not quite as easy, but all LMGTFY does is craft a query string. That's mostly a matter of replacing spaces by plus-signs and avoiding special characters:

https://www.google.com/#q=how+to+cre...d+google+query

Quote:
Originally Posted by braumeister View Post
I have a feeling the WSJ will eliminate this loophole before too much longer.
They would have to have Google's cooperation. I suppose they could pay for that.
__________________
bUU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2015, 07:57 AM   #7
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
imoldernu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Peru
Posts: 4,616
WSJ, NYT and every online/pay newspaper that I'm aware of opens articles to Google search, but usually just for that single article. The NYT allows a small number of free visits to the site each month which it monitors with a cookie count. Our local newspapers work the same way... though the strange thing is... even though I am paying for the print version, I have to pay more, for direct access online.

When I see a headline I'm interested in, I usually highlight it, right click and "Search Google for *****".

As a poor news junkie, I just can't afford to subscribe to the dozens and dozens of online news sites, when I may only visit them once or twice a year. Foreign country papers usually offer different viewpoints of news, so access to them is especially appreciated.

I believe the OP is correct... that the pay websites cannot afford to lose the exposure that's available through Google search. They certainly have the ability to block ALL access, if they wanted to do that.

Just my opinion.
__________________
imoldernu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2015, 08:05 AM   #8
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Nemo2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Belleville, ONT
Posts: 4,302
Quote:
Originally Posted by imoldernu View Post
The NYT allows a small number of free visits to the site each month which it monitors with a cookie count. Our local newspapers work the same way....
Incognito windows are generally valuable in these circumstances.
__________________
"Exit, pursued by a bear."

The Winter's Tale, William Shakespeare
Nemo2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2015, 01:43 PM   #9
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
bUU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by imoldernu View Post
I believe the OP is correct... that the pay websites cannot afford to lose the exposure that's available through Google search. They certainly have the ability to block ALL access, if they wanted to do that.
Their ideal would be for Google to agree to connect to their server using provided credentials.
__________________
bUU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2015, 10:22 PM   #10
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Coronado
Posts: 505
This works because of Google's "First Click Free" program. If a news source wants to appear in Google search results without a "subscription" tag, then they have to let Googlebot index their entire text, and they also have to allow users coming from Google to read at least 5 articles per day without displaying a pay wall. Google does not offer sites like the WSJ an option to pay for indexing.

Quote:
It is possible to limit the number of free articles that a Google News reader can access via First Click Free. A user coming from the domain [*.google.*] must be able to see a minimum of 5 articles per day. This practice is described as “metering” the user: when the user has clicked on too many of a publisher’s articles from Google News, the meter for freely accessible articles on that site is exhausted. If your site meters access on a weekly or monthly basis, you are still responsible for showing a minimum of five articles per day to Google users. Otherwise, your site will be treated as a subscription site.
https://support.google.com/news/publ...er/40543?hl=en
__________________
cathy63 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2016, 01:17 PM   #11
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
sengsational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by cathy63 View Post
This works because of Google's "First Click Free" program. If a news source wants to appear in Google search results without a "subscription" tag, then they have to let Googlebot index their entire text, and they also have to allow users coming from Google to read at least 5 articles per day without displaying a pay wall. Google does not offer sites like the WSJ an option to pay for indexing.



https://support.google.com/news/publ...er/40543?hl=en
Does this still work for everyone? It didn't work for me, but I had a few hits on wsj.com before I allowed scripting to run.
__________________
sengsational is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2016, 01:21 PM   #12
Moderator
Sarah in SC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 13,456
It usually works for me, but I haven't tried it lately.
In related news, did you see this? I need some AA miles and this was a good deal, as long as I remember to cancel!
2600 American AAdvantage Miles for $0.00077 Apiece - View from the Wing
__________________
ďOne day your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it's worth watching.Ē
Gerard Arthur Way

Sarah in SC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2016, 01:43 PM   #13
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Katsmeow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,392
Hmmm... I tried searching for the Wall Street Journal Trans Fat Phobia article on Google. When I clicked on the article though it said I had to be a subscriber to read it. I don't think I've read anything else on WSJ this month.
__________________
Katsmeow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2016, 02:17 PM   #14
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by sengsational View Post
Does this still work for everyone? It didn't work for me, but I had a few hits on wsj.com before I allowed scripting to run.
In the past couple of weeks I read that the WSJ was going to stop allowing this. Can't find any reference to this now, though, so it may have been a senior moment.
__________________
MichaelB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2016, 02:28 PM   #15
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Coronado
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by sengsational View Post
Does this still work for everyone? It didn't work for me, but I had a few hits on wsj.com before I allowed scripting to run.
Yes, it still works for me. Go to news.google.com and search for the known title of a WSJ article. Click through gives me the full text. (I had not read 5 articles today though.)
__________________
cathy63 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2016, 05:09 PM   #16
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
imoldernu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Peru
Posts: 4,616
I would never do this, but the way NYT tracks your "free" articles is by stopping access after you have accumulated 7 cookies.
If you go to your settings for "cookies" and searched NYT, then deleted those cookies, you're back to square 1.

But that's not a nice thing to do...
__________________
imoldernu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2016, 09:13 AM   #17
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
sengsational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelB View Post
In the past couple of weeks I read that the WSJ was going to stop allowing this. Can't find any reference to this now, though, so it may have been a senior moment.
Nope, I think your grey cells are functioning properly.

Before, I had not google searched "news" (I just used a standard "all" search). Today, I went to "news.google.com" and put in "hottest ideas in finance capital controls are good", but did not get a hit on the actual article. If I clicked "all" instead of limiting myself to "news", the article was the first link (not logged into google at the time, no wsj cookies). When I clicked the link in the "all" results, I hit the paywall.

Theory: Maybe articles that are older let you sneak through, but fresh ones are not indexed in the "news" section by google?

Quote:
I would never do this, but the way NYT tracks your "free" articles is by stopping access after you have accumulated 7 cookies.
If you go to your settings for "cookies" and searched NYT, then deleted those cookies, you're back to square 1.
I have my browser to configured to delete all cookies when I close the browser (unless I've white listed the domain). I also have the same thing with flash cookies using "Better Privacy" plug-in. So when I log on, only my regular banking sites, regular shopping sites, and the like have any history.
__________________
sengsational is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2016, 09:21 AM   #18
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by imoldernu View Post
I would never do this, but the way NYT tracks your "free" articles is by stopping access after you have accumulated 7 cookies.
If you go to your settings for "cookies" and searched NYT, then deleted those cookies, you're back to square 1.

But that's not a nice thing to do...
Even easier . . . open all the articles in "incognito mode." No cookies no cry.
__________________

__________________
Retired early, traveling perpetually.
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to pass on the nest-egg donheff Young Dreamers 29 02-16-2007 01:27 PM
Email Memo-$16.8 million at stake here.Could I pass as one of the Eich boys poboy Other topics 2 04-01-2006 11:02 AM
Wall Street Journalhttp://online.wsj.com/public/us Martha Other topics 3 11-08-2005 09:29 PM
Too good to pass up nfs Life after FIRE 4 02-16-2005 06:49 PM
Should you pass up a "great deal"? Nords FIRE and Money 12 07-24-2004 03:33 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:21 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.