There is. It's called Apple News+

https://www.apple.com/apple-news/

It should be noted that, in the US at least, your library card will often give you online access to many publications.

This. Is. Exactly. What. I. Wish. For. A. Very. Long. Time.

Nowadays every news site has paywalls. I'm willing to pay for good work, but if I pay a single news provider, I'm missing too much. Nobody is willing to pay for every publisher. Even if an article is just a few cents I neither want to be annoyed with the payment process nor do I want to manually keep track of how much I spent for news in a month.

We really need a platform providing a news flat rate, aggregating most larger publishers.

I mean this isn't exactly the answer you're looking for but in the UK we do, the BBC doesn't have ads and the cost is covered by taxes rather than paying a "Spotify premium" subscription

I recently found ground.news. it is an interesting news aggregator sight in that it combined multiple sources for each story. It doesn't really answer some of your needs but for each story it shows you which sources are pay-walled and which ones aren't.

You're use of spotify as an example is a good reason. Journalism isn't making money and Spotify's royalties are (or at least were not long ago) the lowest amongst the music streaming services. The ads on their own sites pay a lot more than any aggregator would give them.

I think this would actually drive shittier quality.

Current models, like the preceding model of physical paper delivery, have a relatively fixed income stream from the subscriber base. They make the same amount of money whether the news day is "Japan Attacks Pearl Harbor" level or whether the most interesting story is that a German Shepherd won the AKC dog show.

Under a service that aggregates and pays a minor amount per click, how does NYT stand out above WaPo? Or Ap or Reuters? Click bait headlines and incomplete stories so they can write multiple and get more clicks, because each click is not worth very much.

I think the better model for NYT et al would be to offer a punch card like option: 10 articles, $15... or whatever. They should have enough data to determine what the average number of articles read is, per subscriber, to determine what the tipping point is, and capture some new pay-as-you go subscribers.

This seems like a direction https://ground.news/ could go in.

Isn't news free though?

I agree the convenience would be great. But the reason it’s rare is that the business model does not work out for the newspapers.

This would lead to reduced revenue for the newspapers.

We already live in the world where news is behind paywall and disinformation is free. This would lead to collapse of more newspapers and further deterioration of the landscape.

We need a better model than Spotify to apply to news.

Because good journalism is expensive and the space is so much more competitive in the digital age. Also greed, usually it's greed preventing us from having good things.

What, something that keeps removing features?

It could be set up in a way that the publications get paid per view of their articles

This is idea behind the BAT token and the Brave Browser¹. Unfortunately it won't break through paywalls, but ad blocking is pretty good and in theory is less guilt.

¹ although, there is this

I think Inkl does exactly what you want

Something reasonably close but not exactly that would be feedly