|
|
May 19, 2013
|
|
|
|
 NYT Puts Up a PaywallPosted on Mar 17, 2011
Let’s try this again, shall we? The New York Times has experimented in the past with the idea of charging for content, and starting later this month the Grey Lady is launching a new pay-to-play plan and squirreling most of what’s fit to print behind a firewall. —KA
Advertisement TAGS:
|
Truthdigger of the Week: Sen. Angus King
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By peter1a, March 19, 2011 at 9:46 am Link to this comment
Revealing survey
http://tinyurl.com/4zbnyro
Report thisBy D Bauer, March 18, 2011 at 1:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
After NYT’s shameless rah-rah cheerleading of us into the Iraq debacle and its more recent spitting on Julian Assange and Wikileaks while at the same time using Wikileaks exposures for front page articles, to list just a couple of examples, why would anyone want to pay for that kind of journalistic incompetence and hypocrisy?
Report thisBy samosamo, March 18, 2011 at 11:53 am Link to this comment
****************
Good thing in this economy, it is easier to NOT go to some
arrogant msm site and pay for what can be found on a site that
doesn’t charge, for now.
And this sure seems to be another silly way for a business to
shoot itself in the foot while cutting off its nose in the mean
time. Which means ‘are the taxpayers subsidizing the msm or
how much are the citizens subsidizing the msm’?
And being unemployed certainly doesn’t lend itself to paying for
Report thisnews or information that is existing on advertizing.
By peter1a, March 18, 2011 at 9:27 am Link to this comment
You can essentially blame this all on Rupert Murdoch and his News Corp !! If he hadn’t taken the Times of London Pay Per View none of this nonsense would have occurred !!
As to me?? I WILL NEVER PAY FOR ONLINE NEWS !!!!!
Report thisBy TheHandyman, March 17, 2011 at 6:58 pm Link to this comment
The NYT has been pretty much irrelevant for a number of years so every month that I don’t read anything from the Times is just another $15 I’m saving.
Report thisBy kerryrose, March 17, 2011 at 5:05 pm Link to this comment
Whenever I follow a link to Times article, I have to log in with a subscription to proceed to the article.
Pay to play. The Times union-busted 15 years ago before it was popular (using contractors to get around union rules) and when the union was busted they sent the work to India.
All this has apparently not netted them enough still, so now it’s pay to play.
Report thisBy diamond, March 17, 2011 at 4:18 pm Link to this comment
Why don’t they just pack it in? The real news isn’t in the papers any more: it’s on the internet and has been for some time.
Report thisBy GG, March 17, 2011 at 4:15 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Good luck with all that NYT… paging Newsvine !
Report thisBy TDoff, March 17, 2011 at 4:00 pm Link to this comment
If the NYT feels it is proper to try to charge for the virtual news it is attempting to peddle, we should feel it’s OK to attempt to pay with virtual money.
Report this