National Geographic has been driving me crazy with this email popup. I won't be giving them my email, so sadly I will not be reading any National Geographic articles.
Tangent: I used to subscribe to the mag for years.
I was getting steadily more frustrated with the shift towards US domestic content and away from nature and the world, but I there was still good stuff in there and I was a big fan of sponsoring the research and exploration.
Then they sold to Murdoch, and so my subscription was no longer fuelling the research and exploration stuff, so I stopped in disgust.
Still miss what I remember of the 'good old days'.
My Grandmother had a subscription to the mag going back to the mid 1960s, I read all of them, and it enriched my childhood. The online experience has always sucked, but in different ways over the years.
20 Yrs ago my brother bought 2 years worth of magazines from the kabadi bazar* in India it was a treasure trove. I was thinking of subscribing a few days back but based on what people are saying here I am wondering if I should buy old stuff from ebay instead.
* You sell old newspaper and magazines by the kilo in India for recycling, sometimes they make their way to a huge market where people are selling old stuff in a huge market called Kabadi bazar think of it like a pawn shops fair every Sunday.
I've had a subscription for decades - I can't see a shift toward what I genuinely expected when Murdoch bought it. Yes, they focus more on US issues than in the past, but I have to assume that is where their market is. But environmental issues and nature conservation are still very prominent in the publication.
If you're boycotting something based on false rumors you read on an Internet forum, I'm not sure how you buy anything.
Hey, I heard that Kim Jong-un bought out all the world's watermelon farms, so every time you buy a watermelon you're contributing to the oppression of North Koreans!
That's a lot of words to say: "the OP is incorrect". But I appreciate your concern.
And, so there is some factual outcome or use to this thread, I'd like to add that I'm looking forward to Murdoch rotting in actual, or metaphorical, hell.
> Then they sold to Murdoch, and so my subscription was no longer fuelling the research and exploration stuff, so I stopped in disgust.
Is there any proof of the funding part? I find it hard to believe they would partner with Fox for years before forming the joint venture, not get anything out of the partnership, and then form a joint venture and get even less.
I personally just use support@ emails. There's a good chance it opens up a support ticket and slightly annoys someone. you could also use caprivacy@twdc.com to really tick them off.
Nice. I've been finding myself using the F12 tools more and more recently to tweak websites I use often - say to change the background colour or font. Not a web dev, but it's fun to look under the hood and play about with things.
Yeah, somehow I rarely come across the correct order of those. For me, it's usually "agree to cookies" or other nonsense first and then "region-go-fuck-yourself" kind of stuff.
I just came here to complain about that! It's the most obnoxious popup, ffs at least show it at the start so I don't waste my time on 1/5 of an article.
I understand the annoyance, but I really hope the parent comment does not remain the top comment on this post. I hope that would be related to the content, not the issues around its presentation.
For anyone who needs it, both the source material and an alternate link have been posted as top-level comments.
I'll give an annoying popup/paywalled page one chance by trying reader mode, which often works. I'm extremely rarely motivated enough to bother trying any harder than that to read an article the publisher is actively working against me being able to read.
I didn't even consider reader mode to be honest. I've been using the disable-javascript thing for so long it's become the automatic go-to when I get such popups.
Plus if you're decent with the inspector, you can usually remove the paywall and then if the body doesn't scroll find the Event Listener for `onscroll` and kill that; it almost always is just a simple fn preventing scroll events
On this National Geographics page, in the inspector just select the <body> and in the CSS pane remove the "position: fixed" and "overflow: hidden". This allows scrolling.
This kind of comment chain helps me remember how amazing uBlock Origin is. I don't see the popup or the inline adverts, and uBlock just works without breaking the site. Amazing.
It just works so well, in fact, that I forget it is there at all, and I am glad to occasionally get these reminders.
I assume this is related to the "Enter your email to read this article" popup?
As an aside, I used to work on a technical team that handled things like that on a relatively high-traffic website. I was told at the time that the rough "going rate" for an email address entered this way was $20.
This specifically always makes me wish that some kind of advertising revenue share would catch on and make this kind of thing feel like a win-win rather than feel as though I'm being exploited.
This may hit you with a Google captcha that is a worse nag — on the submitted web page, at least, you can type in whatever you want in the box instead of becoming a computer trainer for a few moments.
I thought archive.today only uses a captcha when saving a snapshot of a page, not when viewing a given snapshot, which would mean GP's link wouldn't hit you with a captcha.
> the landscape undergo a remarkable change. The greenery shifted from a variety of leafy trees and plants to barren grassy fields rimed with stunted oak and pine. The difference in vegetation reflected a change in the underlying geology, evincing rocks with excess magnesium and too little calcium for most plants to thrive. We had driven onto the mantle.
Oh they get it. But good photos require sometimes multiple talented photogs and a support team. These are expensive. Their cashflow was on the decline, because nobody buys magazines anymore. Magazines had a higher profit margin than online impressions, until they didn't anymore.
Nobody's paying, nobody's funding expeditions or in-depth research.
Race to the bottom! Last one there wins ... somehow.
Soldiers Delight is a preservation area, so the rangers won't be pleased if you go off the trail there, nor should they be - I expect the researchers had to clear their visit in advance. But there are plenty of formations around here similar to the one in the article photo; I feel like you'd have a harder time finding a state park without them, than with.
