Ann Althouse relays word that the New York Times is mulling a return to some kind of paid subscription scheme.Never mind that Pinchy's last attempt at erecting a pay-wall -- called TimesSelect -- failed miserably, likely because there are only 48,726 alternative liberal media outlets. And most have far better reporting and analysis than that provided by the likes of Dowd and Krugman.
Pinch, a word of advice: the Internet doesn't care if you make money.
One personal friend of Sulzberger said a final decision could come within days, and a senior newsroom source agreed, adding that the plan could be announced in a matter of weeks. (Apple’s tablet computer is rumored to launch on January 27, and sources speculate that Sulzberger will strike a content partnership for the new device, which could dovetail with the paid strategy.) It will likely be months before the Times actually begins to charge for content, perhaps sometime this spring. Executive Editor Bill Keller declined to comment. Times spokesperson Diane McNulty said: “We’ll announce a decision when we believe that we have crafted the best possible business approach. No details till then.”
For all the praise heaped upon Democrats for their "savvy" use of the Internet (primarily geared towards campaign fundraising fraud) these leftists really don't understand the Internet.
Countdown to failure in 3... 2...
Hat tip: Memeorandum.
2 comments:
It's not that they don't understand the internet, it's that they don't understand markets.
Oh heck, they'll probably sell a gajillion subscriptions to people with WhiteHouse.gov email addresses and call it even.
How many people even read the NYT. The only way I have a clue about what's in the NYT is someone talking about what it said. For all I know, there could be only one reader feeding everyone else. The NYT is fast making itself irrelevant, who pays for that?
Post a Comment