Digital subscription acceleration has also brought up the issue of subscription fatigue. The proponents of the concept claim that, due to the proliferation of non-publishing subscription services (Netflix, Spotify etc.), people will reach their subscription saturation point, at publishers' expense. Evidence of this is lacking, however. Perhaps it is the reason behind the low number of paying subscribers, and the limited number of publications subscribed per individual. But is this much different from the heyday of print? How many different press publications did most people subscribe to then?

Behind the concept of fatigue are the suppliers promoting other models. Some still advocate selling items on a one-off basis. But this practice continues to decline, as demonstrated by the   discontinuation of this offer in 2019 by the title "The European" and more importantly,   the end of this model for Dutch platform Blendle in 2019, the latter permanently pivoting towards a subscription model. It is these offers seeking to imitate Netflix or Spotify that triggered a lively debate in the publishing world last spring. The concept of multi-title platforms is not new. There are many international and local players, such as   Inkl in Australia,   Readly in Sweden,   Pressreader (Canadian) or  Le Kiosk. They never really broke through, but Apple's entry may have suggested that the scale was changing. However, the   Apple News + offer instills distrust, particularly by its 50% commission, and several major dailies have refused to join it (the New York Times and the Washington Post). As for others, they publish a reduced version of their content offering on the platform (Wall Street Journal). For the time being, the results show limited success and it is not certain that   the arrival in Europe of Apple News + in September will reverse the trend.