This was posted 2 years 4 months 2 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Washington Post 1-Year Premium Digital Subscription A$9.99 + Second Year Retention Offer A$9.99 (Was A$100/Year)

791
Washington Post 1-Year Premium Digital Subscription A$9.99 + Second Year Retention Offer A$9.99 (Was A$100/Year)
Go to Deal
belbo on 06/01/2022 - 12:32 subscribe.washingtonpost.com (3990 clicks)
Last edited 11/01/2022 - 13:53 by 1 other user

Happened across this offer as a banner ad on a WP article I was reading. There is a lesser option without the bonus subscription (and other features) - but it is the same price. Likewise, there is an option to pay AUD99c every 4 weeks - which is more expensive if you want to take the max subscription period. Cancel any time and keep the remaining paid subscription period. If you try to cancel it offers you the same deal for another year. It doesn't do this again if you try to cancel again. I have made a calendar reminder to cancel in 2 years as I suspect the 2nd year subscription will be cancelled if you cancel your subscription before the second year commences.

Also includes a full featured 30 day pass to give away every month.

I'm guessing the URL is correct. I couldn't get back to it as I had already subscribed when I posted this. Please update the URL if it is wrong.

Subscription confirmation -

Your subscription includes:
• Unlimited access to washingtonpost.com from any device.
• Unlimited access to our entire suite of mobile apps for iOS, Amazon Fire and Android.
• A 30-day digital pass to give to a friend or family member every month.
• One bonus subscription to share with a friend or family member.
• Unlimited downloads of top-rated e-books from Pulitzer prize-winning journalists at The Washington Post.
• The Post Most, a curated daily newsletter featuring the most important and interesting stories of the day.

Books & Magazines Newspaper

Related Stores

The Washington Post
The Washington Post

closed Comments

  • spock on 06/01/2022 - 12:39
    +4

    Or look at the news on the internet for free .

    • nedski on 06/01/2022 - 13:39
      +18

      Reputable news isnt free.

      • tharlow on 06/01/2022 - 13:50
        -2

        Curated news isn’t free. However, if you want the truth — we regret to not inform you that it’s already been buried by the censors. Perhaps you couldn’t handle the truth, anyway.

        • nedski on 06/01/2022 - 13:52
          +22

          Go back to watching Youtube videos that accord with your well established point of view.

          • usernameinvalid on 06/01/2022 - 15:29
            +5

            @nedski: It's a free country, with freedom of speech. Problem is you want to shut them up for exercising their right to speak just because they don't agree with your opinion. That's tyranny my friend!

            • nedski on 06/01/2022 - 15:31
              +5

              @usernameinvalid: Actually my uninformed friend, there is no freedom speech in Australia. There is no "right" you can point to. If only someone had a little education under their belt before spewing out such nonsense.

              • usernameinvalid on 06/01/2022 - 15:45
                -3

                @nedski: "Freedom of speech is a fundamental common law right…"
                https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ip46_ch_2…

                As you can see, we have a common law right to free speech, so either you lied or were uninformed.

                But, the left would rather that there was no freedom of speech, except for them of course. I find it interesting that the left always has to resort to character assisination and shutting down honest debate. Is that because what you believe in wouldn't stand up to debate?

                • nedski on 06/01/2022 - 15:49
                  +23

                  @usernameinvalid: I love it when people just google something and link to the first thing they see.

                  Lawyer here with an actual law degree.. Now if you keep reading your "Australian Law Reform Commission Document" past the first paragraph, you would see this.

                  Paragraph 2.10. However, the freedom is not absolute. For one thing, it only protects some types of speech—political communication.

                  I bet your facebook is full of anti-lockdown and freedom memes.

                  Also learn to spell.

                  • Spamazon on 06/01/2022 - 16:01

                    @nedski: How much did you charge for that advice?

                  • usernameinvalid on 06/01/2022 - 16:13
                    -8

                    @nedski: https://www.ag.gov.au/rights-and-protections/human-rights-an…

                    "Australia is a party to seven core international human rights treaties. The right to freedom of opinion and expression is contained in articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)."

                    Yet more character assassination, huh. What a professional you are! But you're right, I'm not a lawyer. I just believe we should ALL be allowed to speak

                    So, you don't believe people who disagree with you have a right to speak?

                    • Creamsoda on 06/01/2022 - 17:26
                      +13

                      @usernameinvalid: tell that to our fellow Australian Julian Assange. slowly been killed by the country that sells it self as beacon of human rights and freedom of speech.

                  • 1st-Amendment on 07/01/2022 - 09:35
                    -1

                    @nedski:

                    Lawyer here with an actual law degree.

                    Oh this is going to be good…

                    Paragraph 2.10. However, the freedom is not absolute.

                    But no-one said that. Back to school and learn what a straw man is…

                    While we don't have the same protections our US friends have, we still have some degree of freedom and free speech in this country, as the OP claimed.

          • randomvis on 06/01/2022 - 23:53
            +1

            @nedski: Or pay for news owned and tailored for the billionaire owner's viewpoint. Oh, who owns Washington Post? Jeff Bezos!

      • AustriaBargain on 06/01/2022 - 13:58
        +26

        Even irreputable news isn't free. News.com.au charge for most of their "news". SKY charges even more for "news".

        • KangaDrew on 06/01/2022 - 16:27
          +3

          I'm so glad you put news in " " for that tabloid trash :-) Have an upvote! lol

        • randomvis on 06/01/2022 - 23:54
          -3

          I bet you still read it— like everyone else here.

      • kiriakoz on 06/01/2022 - 14:14
        +7

        This is nothing like reputable news, but I agree with you generally.

        • JPerez on 06/01/2022 - 16:57
          +4

          Indeed.

          People who think Corporate News is reputable.

          Follow actual journalists like Glen Greenwald, or people who disect the news and call out the bs.

          • Soave on 07/01/2022 - 03:59

            @JPerez: Would that be Glenn Greenwald who turns up as a paid guest on Fox News regularly?

            • JLai on 07/01/2022 - 17:09
              +1

              @Soave: Which other corporate news media have let him on to lobby for the pardon of Julian Assange and Edward Snowden?

              • Soave on 07/01/2022 - 17:20

                @JLai: He can’t ‘lobby’ without going on Fox and being paid for it?

                He’s got a massive profile on Twitter and via his newsletter. Why should news orgs interview an outside journalist with his own for-profit agenda? I’d say they’re better off interviewing elected officials, DOJ figures or decision makers empowered to actually do something.

                • JLai on 07/01/2022 - 20:44
                  +1

                  @Soave: Why wouldn't you want to reach an audience that doesn't regularly follow you?
                  How do you change the minds of others that have a differing view without going into their space and presenting your argument to them?

                  • Soave on 07/01/2022 - 22:00
                    -1

                    @JLai: Fox would not put him anywhere near their audience if he wasn’t following the script. I’d bet his activism for Assange and Snowden is mainly in the form of bitching about Hillary and Obama.

                    Of course, Assange and Snowden must be thrilled with his effective advocacy…

                    • JLai on 08/01/2022 - 01:36
                      +2

                      @Soave:

                      Fox would not put him anywhere near their audience if he wasn’t following the script. I’d bet his activism for Assange and Snowden is mainly in the form of bitching about Hillary and Obama.

                      How do you know he was paid and had to follow a script? Have you watched his appearances on Jimmy Dore or Breaking Point? He holds the same views and the same arguments that he presented on Fox and Tucker Carlson.

                      Of course, Assange and Snowden must be thrilled with his effective advocacy…

                      So, we should just give up and not talk about it or not correct lies perpetuated by warmongers and the security state because we don't like the platform GG is presenting his arguments on? This is how you create echo chambers and increase the divide between left and right.

                      • Soave on 08/01/2022 - 14:27

                        @JLai: I’m speaking figuratively when I say he sticks to the script. I mean he’ll reliably stay ‘on message’, attacking Democrats, the “MSM” etc.

                        Fox is in the business of providing a strict diet of information to their audience. GG is used by Fox to present a facade of ‘balance’ since wow they’ve got this fearless iconoclast, a leftist, an independent, a gay man, an activist, a lawyer courageously protecting journalists… he’s supposed to look like he’s outside their value system, but he isn’t (not anymore).

                        I mean the guy also complains about a big tech hegemony, with his two million Twitter followers. He’s basically a shit stirrer who right wingers love to death; right wingers being the group he doesn’t attack any more.

      • bchliu on 06/01/2022 - 14:16
        +9

        lol. US Propaganda isn't free

      • NNOP on 06/01/2022 - 14:33
        +16

        WaPo certainly isn't reputable news though. They are US corporate 'blue-team' hacks.

        For all its faults our own ABC is far better than the shitty old WaPo and it costs us nothing (directly).

        • gakko on 06/01/2022 - 16:07
          +1

          PBS news hour the best news in America

      • M00Cow on 06/01/2022 - 14:41
        +4

        So Abc, SBS, Guardian, AAP, Ch9, Ch7, BBC, Reuters, Al-Jazeera, CNN, 1News, CBC, Deutsche welle, to name a few aren't reputable?

        • nedski on 06/01/2022 - 14:42

          You know the point I was making, dont be a smart ass.

          • M00Cow on 06/01/2022 - 14:49
            +8

            @nedski: The only thing You said was

            Reputable news isnt free.

            Reading from that the, point you were making Is blatantly untrue. I cited examples. Not sure why you're upset.

            And you're on Ozbargain, it's smartarse

            • nedski on 06/01/2022 - 14:59

              @M00Cow: Is your name James and you used to play Discworld MUD by any chance?

          • KangaDrew on 06/01/2022 - 16:29

            @nedski: Is that title being saved specifically for you is it?

        • Tyrx on 06/01/2022 - 15:33
          +4

          The Guardian, Ch9, Ch7, Al-Jazeera, CNN and CBC all have terrible reputations in journalism. With that said, The Guardian and Al-Jazeera sometimes have half decent investigative journalism so it's a bit of mixed bag for those two. You have to filter out the politically motivated crap though.

          • nedski on 06/01/2022 - 15:50
            +7

            @Tyrx: The Guardian has terrible reputation?? Are you kidding? Maybe if you are a Sky News or Fox News watcher.

            • JPerez on 06/01/2022 - 16:59

              @nedski: Yes. They do.

            • Tyrx on 06/01/2022 - 17:28
              -2

              @nedski: The Guardian is on the same level of Sky and Fox news, so I'm not surprised you jumped to those - opposites attract. :)

            • 1st-Amendment on 07/01/2022 - 09:45
              +2

              @nedski:

              The Guardian has terrible reputation?? Are you kidding?

              Lol, ALL corporate media is a joke. What's ironic is that you identified those faults from sources you disagree with (Sky/Fox) but are blind to the very same tactics when as long as it aligns with your ideology. This is classic echo chamber behaviour…

              The role of media is supposed be to ask tough questions and report a balanced view of events from various sides of any debate. No major media outlet you can name does this consistently. They all have a political narrative that they are trying to push.

          • JPerez on 06/01/2022 - 16:59
            +2

            @Tyrx: Al Jazeera is funded by the Qatari goivernment.

            The Guardian lost their reputatioin when they smeared and made up lies about that Syrian lady years ago.

        • Creamsoda on 06/01/2022 - 17:36
          +4

          How many of those conveniently peddled the WMD narrative and aired the Nayirah testimony? lets not forget the Syrian chemical attack narrative. it never bloody ends with those lot pushing hate and war around the world and its never about making lives better for the people of those affected countries. War = Evil those that sells them are even worse.

        • robredo on 06/01/2022 - 17:55

          One should distinguish between reputable and those that are just spewing out the same narrative https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/2020/trusted-news-initiative…

        • kiriakoz on 06/01/2022 - 22:02
          +1

          Channel 7, 9?? CNN? Al-Jazeera? Oh no, your problem is that you have no idea what you are on about. Tried to be clever but watching absolute garbage.

          • albiilive on 06/01/2022 - 23:00

            @kiriakoz: I don't understand this comment, he said they have terrible reputations (which I agree, most of them do - with good reason), not that he watches them?

            Who is being clever now….

            • kiriakoz on 07/01/2022 - 09:33

              @albiilive: You obviously can’t follow the thread. I’m replying to the guy who said they were all reputable. It’s his response that I clicked reply to.

        • Aloot on 07/01/2022 - 10:19
          +1

          BBC is State sponsor Neocolonialism and Al-Jazeera is a straight-up Islamist mouthpiece.

      • KangaDrew on 06/01/2022 - 16:24

        It is if you know how to bypass their paywall ;-)

      • JoeBogan on 06/01/2022 - 18:33
        +4

        Washington post is owned by Jeff Bezos, reputable? Yeah nahhh

      • Lurk Hartog on 07/01/2022 - 08:33

        It costs folks like you and me,
        And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five, who willllllllllllll?

    • burns13 on 06/01/2022 - 18:08
      +1

      Cheap news isn't good. Good news isn't cheap

      • albiilive on 06/01/2022 - 23:04

        Shit, all out of good news, got plenty of bad news though, if you wanna pay for that ;)

  • Daabido on 06/01/2022 - 12:42
    +34

    It's the Jeff Bezos blog.

    • tharlow on 06/01/2022 - 13:53
      +13

      It’s completely independent… free of editorial interference… once you’ve been thoroughly vetted by the big man himself, of course

      • robredo on 06/01/2022 - 18:00
        +1

        100% ;) The partners currently within the TNI are: AP, AFP; BBC, CBC/Radio-Canada, European Broadcasting Union (EBU),Facebook, Financial Times, First Draft, Google/YouTube, The Hindu, Microsoft , Reuters, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Twitter, The Washington Post.

  • shaybisc on 06/01/2022 - 12:44

    Why would anyone get the All-Access for the same price as the Premium?

    • Hikey on 06/01/2022 - 13:39
      +6

      Inferior subscription options are often included for the same price in subscription pricing plans to make the premium subscription seem even more attractive. It's only there for marketing purposes.

    • KangaDrew on 06/01/2022 - 16:29

      Why would anyone pay when you can get it all for free?

  • carpecrash on 06/01/2022 - 12:44
    +2

    Awesome, thanks OP

  • bohn on 06/01/2022 - 12:50

    Mobilism for android

  • mymumsaysiamhandsome on 06/01/2022 - 12:56
    +55

    https://12ft.io/
    Show me a 10 ft paywall, I ll show you a 12 ft ladder

    • alidli on 06/01/2022 - 13:13
      +2

      Bookmarked……isn't the internet great sometimes.

    • voteoften on 06/01/2022 - 13:26
      +2

      Thanks!!!

    • mandelbrot on 06/01/2022 - 13:44
      +1

      I'm getting "500 internal server error" each time I try a site. Am I doing it wrong? Wonder if the ad blockers on my browser affect it

      • mostlygordon on 06/01/2022 - 13:51
        +1

        Probably OzBargained;-)

        • alidli on 06/01/2022 - 14:05
          +10

          They raised the paywall to 13ft

      • mymumsaysiamhandsome on 06/01/2022 - 13:54

        just tried on mobile and desktop chrome. no issues for me.

        • TruthNuke on 06/01/2022 - 14:01

          google chrome is a botnet

        • mandelbrot on 06/01/2022 - 15:05
          +1

          I'm using mobile chrome and Firefox and not working. Must be the ad blockers and other extensions I've got running

      • M00Cow on 06/01/2022 - 14:42
        +1

        You need to find an article/page inside the paywall, heraldsun.com.au won't work.

        • scanuck on 06/01/2022 - 18:16

          Can you expand on this m00cow?

    • pharkurnell on 06/01/2022 - 14:08
      +1

      Yep been using it since was posted recently on here…. only failed a few times so far.

    • AussieDaddy on 06/01/2022 - 15:05
      +1

      Have tried WaPo & NY Times and got the "500 | Internal Sever Error" message.

    • scanuck on 06/01/2022 - 15:30
      +1

      Work on any Aussie sites?

    • billsa on 06/01/2022 - 16:55
      +2

      It seems to work better with Australian News orgs. Doesn’t work with WSJ or NyTimes at least for me.

    • Maz78 on 07/01/2022 - 08:25

      Great site, I've also been using this add-on as well:
      https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome

      Doesn't get past every site, but handy nonetheless.

      • bohn on 07/01/2022 - 08:59

        I use the firefox version - which site doesn't it get by?

  • shaybisc on 06/01/2022 - 12:56

    Stalled on captcha with Paypal. Had to use debit card.

  • skinny on 06/01/2022 - 12:59
    +8

    US news is a bit boring these days without Trump..

    • Tomhaigh1 on 06/01/2022 - 14:17

      everyday was new under Trump.

  • bargainatoraah on 06/01/2022 - 13:06
    +12

    Propaganda

  • freefall101 on 06/01/2022 - 13:07
    +2

    Every year I go to cancel my subscription and they pop up a new deal for that year. I got $9.99AU for this year as well.

    I keep paying for it simply because there's basically no source of US news that isn't paywalled these days, might as well have one and just ignore any article about tax reform/Bezos/billionaires.

    • Emerald Owl on 06/01/2022 - 14:33

      No source? All the tv channels, abc, nbc, cbs, cnn, fox news, etc

  • shaybisc on 06/01/2022 - 13:21
    +4

    I hope they have a better cancellation system than the NY TImes, which had no online way to do it when I was with them. I had to ring New York to cancel.

    • BigBirdy on 07/01/2022 - 08:23

      NYTimes can be cancelled, changed, etc using the online chat. I’ve used it numerous times

    • 811b11e8 on 08/01/2022 - 07:29

      They have an online cancellation form it's just they hide it depending on your jurisdiction. If they are not legally required to show it to you they hide it so you have to contact them in person so they can make it more difficult to cancel before the next renewal.

  • DjPantsu on 06/01/2022 - 13:22
    +13

    Or just use the bypass paywall extension

  • sputmayer on 06/01/2022 - 13:36
    +5

    I was with them and it was all fine until I wanted to get the subscription cancelled. You need to call their US number and get it cancelled, there is no way you can do it via their app or website. It was an absolute torture

    • Miss B on 06/01/2022 - 13:50
      +1

      Glad I set it up with my card that I only put money on for signing up to things then.

    • Etster on 06/01/2022 - 13:53
      +5

      Set up via PayPal and you can just cancel the payment any time. All US subscriptions are a nightmare to cancel.

    • M00Cow on 06/01/2022 - 14:51

      But you're helping Jeff get into space.

  • Lets Go Brandon on 06/01/2022 - 13:44
    -7

    Washington Post is my favourite source for fake news.

    • nedski on 06/01/2022 - 13:53
      +5

      Your username confirms your immaturity..

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join