In 2017, on the day after Inauguration Day, I signed up for a $100/year online subscription to The Washington Post. “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” yes, give me that, give me allllll of that. My intention was to support Journalism; I picked the particular paper in large part because of the columns of Alexandra Petri (her most recent column: “To Clarify, I Meant Ban Abortion Except for Republican Politicians: Myself Is the Last Person Who Should Be Bothered by My Values”).
I would be interested to see a little graph of my satisfaction levels each year when the subscription auto-renewed. For the first few years, satisfaction levels were high: DEMOCRACY DIES IN DARKNESS!! SUPPORT JOURNALISTS!!! SHINE A LIGHT!!! ETC.!!!
At some unknown point, I became aware that Jeff Bezos, multi-billionaire owner of Amazon, was also the multi-billionaire owner of The Washington Post. Satisfaction levels dropped somewhat—but, you know, Very Rich People have often funded such things, AS WELL THEY SHOULD. Carnegie. Rockefeller. Something about the railroads? I don’t really know anything except that rich people funded things and named them after themselves. Maybe that sort of thing was okay. Maybe that’s one of the GOOD ways rich people can spend their money! Journalism! Museums! Concert halls! Etc.! SOMEONE needs to fund those things! Maybe the opinion pieces on topics such as “Capitalism Is Great, Actually,” and “It Would Hurt Us All To Raise Taxes on Billionaires” were fine, just, you know, balanced discourse. I’m not really reading any of the articles I have access to, but we should still Support Journalism in These Dark Times.
In the last couple of years, I started wondering if another organization could make better use of my hundred dollars a year—especially when I saw subscription offers now going for $30. But I was reluctant to actually unsubscribe. It felt like Defunding/Devaluing Journalism.
Then, this week, The Washington Post sent an email, very similar to the emails I keep getting each year as my Amazon Prime membership increases, telling me that my subscription would be increasing to $120/year. I’d found my Line: $100 for a purely digital subscription I wasn’t actually using was Okay, but $120 for a purely digital subscription I was not actually using was Not Okay. I DO want to support journalism, I DO!! But I feel like maybe Jeff Bezos can easily afford to support it without my specific help? And also: I find NPR much more useful, news-wise, so perhaps I will just TRANSFER my support to THEM. Win-win! Funding journalism that NEEDS funding! Plus, NPR sometimes gives me a cute bird mug/tote!
As I tried to cancel my subscription, I encountered hurdles. First there was the screen that I might have carelessly thought meant I had successfully completed my cancellation—but no, I had to scroll past some paragraphs about the cancellation to find another button to click to ACTUALLY cancel.
Then, after I clicked that button, an offer: Would I like to keep my subscription, for $60/year?? Oh!!! Okay!!! I was already going to willingly pay $100/year! Then you raised it to $120/year, which is why I cancelled! And now it’s $60/year???? All along you could have been happy with HALF what you were going to charge me???? You didn’t NEED to raise the price after all, you were just TRYING IT?????? to SEE IF I’D PAY IT?????
Infuriating. And absolutely confirmed that I was making the right decision. I clicked YES UNSUBSCRIBE.
The next day, a new offer: Would I like to have the subscription for $40/year???
This post has two purposes: first, to tell you about how glad I am that I stopped my subscription to The Washington Post; second, to let you know that if you would like to continue your subscription, you can apparently get a better rate by trying to cancel. (Has anyone gotten similar results while canceling Amazon Prime?)

