Amazon Business Best Books of the Month STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Limited time offer Grocery March Birthstone Shop Popular Services billions billions billions  All-New Echo Dot Starting at $49.99 Kindle Oasis Trade in and get paid instantly Shop Now STEM

Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Showing 1-10 of 149 reviews(Verified Purchases). See all 366 reviews
on August 25, 2013
After the two week trial period I will be canceling my Kindle subscription to the Post. It is true that some content that is in the print edition does not appear in the Kindle version--I'm ok with that and I think it is to be expected to a degree--remember, you don't have to deal with any ads. Rather, my objection is very specific in scope: editorials and op-ed pieces appear on the Kindle version about one day later than the physical paper, with many op-ed columns never appearing. I suspect in the case of the op-eds that this is a function of some sort of publishing rights issue. Regardless, as a regular reader of the Post I just find this fact to be a deal breaker. In this age of instant updates the world over, one of the advantages to a traditional newspaper is its commentary and analysis content, the one realm of journalism least affected by the digital age. To take that away diminishes the value of the product for me. Also, seems to me there should be some way to link the paper's on-line content with your Kindle subscription, but you can't do that. The Post has a pay-wall on their website and I feel that Kindle subscribers should be able to bypass that.
11 comment| 28 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on June 7, 2013
The Washington Post is fabulous on the Kindle. We live in the DC area and subscribe to both the daily paper edition and the Kindle edition. I find myself reading the Kindle edition more often. The way the articles are laid out is so much easier to read then flipping through the paper edition to find the articles you want. If there are articles with a lot of photos then I'll refer to the paper edition (the Kindle edition does have a few photos too just fewer). My husband doesn't have a Kindle which is why we still subscribe to the paper edition, otherwise I might be tempted to cancel it. I love the feel of reading a real newspaper sometimes, but if I want to read my news more quickly, then the Kindle edition is great.

The Kindle edition really is the digital format for which I've been waiting. I intensely dislike most newspaper's websites. It is often difficult to navigate, everything is a bit jumbled together with random ads and I find it difficult to find the day's news since everything is rapidly changing. I don't just want to know about the instant news, but also the smaller but still important things that happened in a day. Websites all too often focus on the immediate. So the Kindle edition is fantastic because it's structured yet still static (so if I want to read an article later on, it's still in the same spot, not moved off the front page.)

Just something to keep in mind when considering a subscription ($11.99 month) vs. purchasing each issue individually (75 cents): The subscription issues automatically delete after a few days (the individual downloads never do) so you have to manually save the issues you want. The individual downloads save in your cloud if you delete them, but the subscription issues are gone forever and not saved in the cloud. The only advantage of a subscription is a slight cost savings and automatic delivery. Other than that, there can be quite a few drawbacks. I personally like revisiting old issues for past stories, so it bothers me that the subscriptions automatically delete old issues. Just a note: the way subscriptions are processed is an Amazon quirk that the Washington Post doesn't control, so it's not a criticism of the Post itself. The Washington Post is my favorite newspaper and I'm just delighted that their Kindle edition is so good.

(If you have any questions about Kindle edition or paper edition, respond in comments and I'll try to answer.)
55 comments| 21 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 6, 2013
Drooping ad sales mean budget cuts. Budget cuts mean staff cuts. To their credit, The Washington Post held off cutting editors and reporters for as long as they could. But it wasn't long enough. And the cuts have been deep and perhaps fatal. These days, every article in the online edition of the Post, at the least, could be sharpened by a deft editor's hand or, at the worst, brought to minimum journalistic standards with the use of spell check, a few rules of grammar and a reminder of the fundamental rules of journalism.

I have seen examples of the following in each section of the Post: sentences in tandem that reflect both the reporter's take and the editor's approach (pick one or the other please); statements of fact that have been tagged for fact checking, but never apparently fact checked; three versions of the same article in one issue of the newspaper; articles that end in mid-sentence; articles that begin in mid-sentence; sentences and paragraphs that repeat themselves in an article.

Some years ago, when the Post launched its online edition, the same problems existed. I wrote them off to the learning curve and new technology. I vowed to be patient with my beloved Post. Then staff cuts wiped out any advances in new media knowledge they may have made. And now the bottom of the barrel is in site. You've reached that bottom when you slog through bad spelling and bad grammar and bad overall editing to discover bad reporting. Superficial coverage of important issues and hyperbole instead of thoughtful prose now run throughout the paper.

Bloggers are seeking to fill the void left by dwindling in-depth coverage. Sadly, few have any training in journalism, and they possess a diminished capacity for reporting all the facts. Newspapers across America are sinking and few are raising the alarm. The Washington Post ship of state is listing and I think I hear the on-deck band striking up "Nearer My God to Thee."

Today, the online Washington Post is better than most, but still much, much worse that it should be.
0Comment| 16 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 7, 2016
After seeing the interview with Bob Woodward as he articulated the goals presented by the paper for the coming presidential campaign I knew I wanted to subscribe. The plans for the in-depth reporting, plans to examine the issues and the back stories, the candidates and their positions makes me know I don't want to miss an issue for the next seven months.
0Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 26, 2014
We live in a very rural area and the nearest small general store/gas station stopped offering the hard copy of this paper years ago. Now that we have better internet service on the mountain it has become easy to get ebooks and other media. I have a Kindle Paperwhite and this feature of getting national newspapers (as a subscription or by the issue) is wonderful. It is well laid out and easy to navigate, clip, and search. There aren't many photographs however but there are also no ads, which is great.
0Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 20, 2014
Best nation wide coverage of any paper. The journalists for this publication have better access to the people in power (and their assistants) and it shows. The Post is really the standard of newspapers across the country. Also, it is not generally considered to have a strong political tilt one way or the other as many papers now do (New York Times- left, Wall Street Journal- right).
0Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on January 25, 2017
The Washington Post is quite simply the best, most accurate and most thoughtful newspaper I have ever subscribed to. I am pleased that Amazon has made it so easy to get this paper online on my Kindle.
0Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 9, 2017
does O K for some sections of the paper (Front page news), but inadequate for others.(sports, arts, real estate)
0Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on January 30, 2017
I would have given zero stars if I had that option. Considering Jef Bezos owns the Washington Post I was expecting a great experience getting the daily on my Kindle. The content was so limited as to make it pointless. Newspapers have done a terrible job transitioning into the digital age and this is no exception. The death of newspapers is rapidly approaching and the Kindle Washington Post is only aiding in its demise
0Comment| 7 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on June 10, 2014
IMHO, there are only four English language newspapers worth spending serious time with, Washington Post, New York Times, Des Spiegel >English< and the Manchester Guardian. I get the Guardian every day, Wash Post on weekends. Washington Post concentrates stories from the nations capital and is very unbiased and open about middle east reporting unlike the NYT. For world financial news the London Economist is outstanding reading and hard to beat
0Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Customers also viewed these items


Need customer service? Click here