Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

    New York Times Will Put Up Web Site Content Paywall

    Starting March 28, the New York Times will begin charging online readers for access to its articles. The switch to digital paywalls reflects a changing business model as newspapers adjust to a larger online readership, says ABC News. NYTimes.com visitors will be permitted to read up to 20 free articles a month, after which they will be charged a monthly rate of $15. While this fee includes smartphone apps, tablet apps will cost an extra $15 to $20, and complete access on all platforms will cost a total of $35. All online content will be made available to paper subscribers for free. Both sales and profits for the New York Times have been inching down over the past several years. Chief Executive Janet Robinson said in early March that the company's print advertising revenue had declined through the fall. Currently, the Wall Street Journal is the largest paywalled site for news and reporting.
    The NTY is my favorite online newspaper. The Google and Android apps are also excellent, but I'm not paying $15 a month to read more than 20 articles. This just sucks!
    |TG-X| mp40x



    Register for the Forums! | Get on Teamspeak! | Play Squad! | Join Discord! | Support Tactical Gamer!


  • #2
    Re: The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

    They have twice tried charging for online news and failed. A $9.99 a month might fly for everything including other papers (The Boston Globe and 15 other dailys) but this new model will fail again.


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

      New York Times Paywall Workaround Springs Up Already

      It hasn't even been 12 hours since the New York Times announced they're implementing a fairly complex paywall scheme, and already at least workaround has sprung up.

      The Times scheme allows readers 20 free stories per month before they have to pay. However, if you come in via Twitter or Facebook, reading the story doesn't count against your total.

      So, cheapskates, meet @freenyt, a three-hour old Twitter feed that intends to tweet all the Times stories.

      "The New York Times paywall begins March 28 http://nyti.ms/eIJC8z. But you can access articles for free if they're posted to Twitter..." messages posted to the account read. "Can you guess where they'll be posted? 'Information wants to be free' - Stewart Brand."

      File this under The Files Will Get Out. And one figures the Times knows that efforts like @freenyt and others will inevitably circumvent the fence. So the real question may be, as Rolling Stone's Tim Dickinson tweeted, whether the paywall can serve as a guilt/annoyance prod for the Times' loyal readers, much like NPR pledge drives do.
      |TG-X| mp40x



      Register for the Forums! | Get on Teamspeak! | Play Squad! | Join Discord! | Support Tactical Gamer!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

        If you don't want your news to be online don't post it online. There are ways to still make money and still dispense your news. Simply put, this model will fail.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

          They did the same with The Times (UK), where you know have to pay a subscription to see their content. It is fairly cheap, but where I used to read their content before, I do not any more, thus they have lost a reader if it mattered.

          Don't fight a battle if you don't gain anything by winning.
          Erwin Rommel

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

            What good is a reader that doesn't pay the bills?

            News is business. NYT is a business. The internet kinda ruins things with, you know, nearly free communication between any one, but if your job is to make an excellent article, fact check, dig for clues, and make personal social connections with important people.... then you need to get paid for it.

            Internet Advertisements are pathetic and over stated in their value.... I say good for them.

            I also express my right to not subscribe.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

              In this Daily Show interview with Walter Isaacson. He talks about print media outlets making a huge mistake by not charging for online content that is also featured in the print edition.

              http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mo...xrs=share_copy

              Here is Isaacson's wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Isaacson


              Also, I seem to remember that the NYT used their building for collateral to get a loan to cover operating costs.
              "Press the red shiny button"~Vortex
              "I may give out, but I'll never give in." ~ Lou Bond "To the Establishment"

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

                To survive they must adapt, the best solution I can see is by teaming up and offering up multiple content from many different sources with a very very cheap account. Let's face it, $15 a month is flat out ridiculous. $15 a year would be reasonable. Better yet if I'm buying their newspaper anyways why shouldn't I also have free access to their web articles for free? Some bean counter somewhere needs to find another job because they obviously don't know how to run their numbers.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

                  Originally posted by Sirusblk View Post
                  To survive they must adapt, the best solution I can see is by teaming up and offering up multiple content from many different sources with a very very cheap account. Let's face it, $15 a month is flat out ridiculous. $15 a year would be reasonable. Better yet if I'm buying their newspaper anyways why shouldn't I also have free access to their web articles for free? Some bean counter somewhere needs to find another job because they obviously don't know how to run their numbers.
                  I agree. My girlfriend gets the Wall Street Journal delivered to her house. I think she only pays around $4/month for online access. Non-subscribers can get it for around $8/month. Still high, but more reasonable than NYT's $15/month. I understand their need to charge, but they need to offer their service at reasonable rates that more people can afford, especially in this economy. Don't they realize that lower fees = more subscribers = more profit?
                  "Common sense is not so common." -Voltaire

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

                    Originally posted by NorthPlum View Post
                    They did the same with The Times (UK), where you know have to pay a subscription to see their content. It is fairly cheap, but where I used to read their content before, I do not any more, thus they have lost a reader if it mattered.
                    Right with you, I used to go there, they had high production values, and were a decent read. Now I hit The Telegraph for the most part along with a few others. Refuse to pay for content I can get for free. Also, looks like the UK is getting The Huffington soon...........

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The New York Times will begin charging for online content March 28th

                      News is everywhere. Charging for news is like charging for air. The news business commodified a certain type of information that is now highly redundant. They need to stop trying to drag 20th century business models into the 21st century.

                      I'll never pay for news. Advertisers pay for most of the news system. If they want to maintain that mode of reaching consumers they can always pay more.

                      Now back to today's online version of the NYTs, free via NYTClean Bookmarklet.
                      sigpic

                      Comment

                      Connect

                      Collapse

                      TeamSpeak 3 Server

                      Collapse

                      Advertisement

                      Collapse

                      Twitter Feed

                      Collapse

                      Working...
                      X