Admittedly, I have never been one for reading the newspaper. I get the Sunday paper delivered now so I can skim through it, maybe, but mostly so I have something to wrap worm food in, and to use as kindling.
Two steaming cups of chocolate goodness. Courtesy of whomever I swiped it from out of the cupboard.
Ben ,'The Killer In Me'
Natter 67: Overriding Vetoes
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, nail polish, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
-t - Mar 17, 2011 8:19:45 am PDT #28831 of 30001
I am a woman of various inclinations and only some of the time are they to burn everything down in frustration
hippocampus - Mar 17, 2011 8:23:37 am PDT #28832 of 30001
not your mom's socks.
Jessica has a point - that the writers' effort is what we're subscribing to. This is a conversation that carries well beyond newspapers.
I rail at advertisements in products I pay for though. That's one thing that really peeved me about cable, which was originally something you paid for in order to get ad-free television. Until it wasn't.
I don't want ads in my books. I hate being trapped with them at the start of movies. I wish them nowhere near my apps (eyah, good luck).
If we're paying for the articles, in this model, we're also paying for a lot of advertisements, and we are getting those in spades (aggressive ones, too).
Jessica - Mar 17, 2011 8:24:09 am PDT #28833 of 30001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Local delivery of the NYT costs $5.85/week, or about $25/month. Outside of the NYC metro area, the print edition is $7.40/week or about $35/month. So $15/month for the same content anywhere in the country (more content, really, since the online version is updated throughout the day and includes video & interactive features) seems like a pretty good deal to me. DH is pretty addicted to the dead tree edition or I'd switch today.
flea - Mar 17, 2011 8:27:47 am PDT #28834 of 30001
information libertarian
$15 a month is a good deal compared to $35 a month, but a bad deal compared to $0 a month. It's all relative.
Jessica - Mar 17, 2011 8:28:09 am PDT #28835 of 30001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
If we're paying for the articles, in this model, we're also paying for a lot of advertisements, and we are getting those in spades (aggressive ones, too).
The ads are the only thing that makes it possible for a newspaper to offer a reasonable subscription price in any format. Take out the ads and the subscription price just about triples.
quester - Mar 17, 2011 8:32:42 am PDT #28836 of 30001
Danger is my middle name, only I spell it R. u. t. h. - Tina Belcher.
I've been paying $12 a year for the crosswords in the NYT, but it also lets me read the online edition. I wonder if that will change.
flea - Mar 17, 2011 8:32:52 am PDT #28837 of 30001
information libertarian
One of the comments on the Times article notes that the commenter lives in India and $15 is about his daily salary, yet he reads the Times regularly online. They don't have differential pricing for the third world, which is interesting. I am sure they have their own numbers on where clicks are coming from, and have considered the issue; it would be fascinating to get some insight into the decision-making process.
Jesse - Mar 17, 2011 8:33:06 am PDT #28838 of 30001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
In other possibly contentious news, for anyone interested in instant oatmeal (THE HORROR!), Serious Eats has done a series of taste-tests: [link]
hippocampus - Mar 17, 2011 8:34:18 am PDT #28839 of 30001
not your mom's socks.
Take out the ads and the subscription price just about triples.
I understand that. That wasn't really my point.
-t - Mar 17, 2011 8:36:20 am PDT #28840 of 30001
I am a woman of various inclinations and only some of the time are they to burn everything down in frustration
Hm, I pay $40/year for the crossword subscription.