Some interesting insights, but I feel your solution doesn't solve anything. Gaining subscribers is ideal as a direct source of revenue that doesn't rely on ads, intermediaries like affiliates, or direct partnership deals, but it directly hinges on reputation, which in turn relies on discoverability. Word of mouth only takes you so far, leaving people to rely primarily on socials (you've rightly mentioned how X panders to sensationalism. Others aren't much better with Facebook dominated by paid ads, TikTok not converting clicks from the platform since it's built for the endless scroll, and others like Threads, Bluesky etc. struggling to take off) and... Google.
You've wrongly placed the blame on publishers creating a race to the bottom when the reality is that it's Google's doing first and foremost. It created an ecosystem where it made people battle for SERPs, provided them with the ads to sustain themselves, then decided it wanted to keep people in Search rather than shipping them to a website. This has resulted in Zero Click Search stealing content, promoting direct partners like Reddit at the top, and serving nothing but sponsored content that leaves the biggest spenders in the best positions. It's the result of an unchecked monopoly and the shifting environments perpetuated by greed, not to mention an inherent inability to curb AI spam websites.
Speaking of shifting environments, it's easy to get nostalgic and pine for the days before search engines and social media, but that wouldn't work nowadays. Publications could get by without catering to SEO back then because there was far less competition and people were actively hungry for media rather than spoiled for choice. It was also far easier to live off smaller wages without the worst global recessions we've seen.
With people having to choose between heating and eating, there's just no way many publications could successfully switch to a subscription model without a level of known premium behind it. Second Wind managed it solely because of Yahtzee, who earned his reputation during the early days of YouTube. That isn't to devalue the expertise of the rest of the team, but I can't envision such a large crowdfunding without him attached. 404 Media seems to be getting along well on the written front because it focuses primarily on investigative journalism, which is truly valuable.
But can you really attribute the same value to game or tech reviews? People should, because protecting independent critique is hugely important, but they don't. In fact, sentiment has already shifted towards people trusting content creators more, who mostly rely on paid sponsorships to get by. It's bonkers to me, honestly, but the climate is rough and people are less willing to part with trust than money - both of which are a commodity nowadays.
I can agree that charging for a physical magazine while keeping the same (usually expanded) content free online is a bad business model, but physical media was always on a losing path, much like how the high street was always going to lose to the convenience of online shopping. Online publications played the Google game because they had to. It swapped regional reach for a global stage, amplifying the available audience. It's just a shame Google keeps moving the goalposts.
As for your comment about outrage regarding PS5 Pro, I once again disagree. Despite firmly being a PC guy, I have a lot of love for consoles and praised Xbox Series X endlessly for its value. Same goes for PS5 generally. The issue is that, during the worst financial crunch we've seen remember, PS5 Pro just doesn't offer the same value as any of the consoles that came before it versus their PC counterpart. People bring up the price of the PS3, which was not only a notorious misfire from Sony but at least went some way to justify it by doubling as a Blu Ray player at a time those were expensive to buy (much like how PS2 was just a better DVD player). People also rightfully state that PCs are still more expensive, which is true, but they can do far more than a PS5, justifying the extra couple of hundred. Being confined to just gaming and still targetting 30-60fps is a tough sell. Granted, PC system requirements are skyrocketing, so that last comment is a general gripe with current optimisation more than any specific ecosystem, but it's still worth mentioning.
There's a great deal of nuance to every discussion you raise here that'd be easier to discuss without charged language like "loser majority," to be blunt. If you've experience successfully running any of these businesses in 2024, I'd be keen to hear more about why you think the way you do.
