Under the deal, Apple consolidated newspapers and magazines in one service for its users. It would not have to provide any content itself, but would instead collect half of the subscription of any newspaper or magazine dumb enough to sign up for it.

However, Apple had not taken into account that newspaper barons had more than a couple of brain cells and the concept of giving Apple half their money for running a mobile website was a bit high.

In its pitch to some news organisations Apple has said it would keep "just half" of the subscription revenue from the service.

The service, described by Apple as a “Netflix for news” would allow users to read an unlimited amount of content from participating publishers for a monthly fee. It is expected to launch later this year as a paid tier of the Apple News app, the people said.

The rest of the revenue would go into a pool that would be divided among publishers according to the number of time users spend engaged with the articles.

Representatives from Apple told publishers that the subscription service could be priced at about $10 a month, similar to Apple’s streaming music service, but the final price could change, if Apple needed some more money to make up for loses to its iPhone.

It is telling that even Apple’s unpaid press office, the New York Times, which long ago sacrificed its credibility as a news source by giving Apple free advertising has not signed up. Neither has the Washington Post.

The Wall Street Journal also has concerns, but said its recent conversations with Apple have been productive.