NY Times Says Some Readers Will Get Around Paywall

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The New York Times says that some people will get around its new paywall (which costs $15 to $35 a month) but they will most likely be teenage slackers and out of work bums. :eek:

"Just as if you run down Sixth Avenue right now and you pass a newsstand and grab the paper and keep running you can actually get the Times free," he said. "It'll be mostly high school kids and people out of work," Sulzberger said, before adding "I can't believe I said that."
Click to expand...
 
New York Times: bought up cheap or bankrupt by 2013.

Horrible idea, hands down, no questions. Nobody is going to pay them over $10+ to read news that can easily be found at many other FREE (better) news outlets. (though with small, unintrusive adspace that you don't really see at all)
 
I have a rule:
"Never talk to the police or to the press, it's too easy to wind up looking stupid".
 
Dylan80 said:
New York Times: bought up cheap or bankrupt by 2013.

Horrible idea, hands down, no questions. Nobody is going to pay them over $10+ to read news that can easily be found at many other FREE (better) news outlets. (though with small, unintrusive adspace that you don't really see at all)
Click to expand...

Please name said free better news outlets that actually PRODUCE news, not just regurgitate content other publications such as the NYT produce with a different spin on it.

And people will probably emo rage over this quote because it is true. When I was a teen I pirated everything because I didn't have money. Now I'm in debt making up for my past freeloading. ;)
 
hehe.. yeah just like everyone getting music and movies for free are doing it because they're teenagers or out of work bums..


they built in their own exploit, they got to live with the consequences of it.
 
Yep lets charge for what is free....

Yea, this dude really needs to learn to shut up. That statement is almost offensive.
 
"most likely be teenage slackers and out of work bums" The problem with this joker is they live from quarter to quarter taking care of shareholders instead of looking years down the road, These teenage slackers and bums might one day be respectable workers or leaders of this country. Saying comes to mind for this chap" Short term gain for long term pain.":p
 
This is up there with paying for bottled water lol. Why pay for this when you can go to CNN.com or any other news outlet that is FREE.
 
This is up there with paying for bottled water lol. Why pay for this when you can go to CNN.com or any other news outlet that is FREE.
Click to expand...

Well yeah but with CNN you won't get the world famous liberal kool aid!! <NYT editorials, esp. that commie Krugman>
 
TwistedAegis said:
Please name said free better news outlets that actually PRODUCE news, not just regurgitate content other publications such as the NYT produce with a different spin on it.
Click to expand...
They may produce news, but that all depends what you consider news.

1. Most news is recycled, even by NYT standards.
2. A lot of news is generated from the Internet.
3. A good amount of news is celebrity news. Which isn't really news.

So who wants to pay $15 a month for that nonsense? Not to forget, every other page is stuffed with ads. So, they don't need to charge to make their money.

And people will probably emo rage over this quote because it is true. When I was a teen I pirated everything because I didn't have money. Now I'm in debt making up for my past freeloading. ;)
Click to expand...
How does that even make sense? If you free load, you're not paying. As an adult, if you have debt, you weren't free loading correctly.

The reason why people are in debt today, is because they're paying for stupid shit like NYT, only to find out what Paris Hilton feels about Libya and Japan's disaster.
 
Ashbringer said:
How does that even make sense? If you free load, you're not paying. As an adult, if you have debt, you weren't free loading correctly.

The reason why people are in debt today, is because they're paying for stupid shit like NYT, only to find out what Paris Hilton feels about Libya and Japan's disaster.
Click to expand...

Great stuff man... I laughed pretty heartily after that one.
 
Steve said:
The New York Times says that some people will get around its new paywall (which costs $15 to $35 a month) but they will most likely be teenage slackers and out of work bums. :eek:
Click to expand...

I can get my news for free from Google, Yahoo, MSN, and BBC news, that's my way around the issue.
 
"most likely be teenage slackers and out of work bums"

Sounds like their core readership if you ask me.
 
Didn't a national paper try to charge for news a few years ago and they only got like 30 subscribers the first month and then realized that people won't pay for what is already free.

In the words of Chef Ramsey "YOU DONKEY!"
 
mrpc9886 said:
Well yeah but with CNN you won't get the world famous liberal kool aid!! <NYT editorials, esp. that commie Krugman>
Click to expand...

so then go to MSNBC, thats free too lol
 
And wait 'til these teens and unemployed adults spread the word on how to access NYT articles for free. How will Sulzberger feel about that? :cool:
 
mrpc9886 said:
Well yeah but with CNN you won't get the world famous liberal kool aid!! <NYT editorials, esp. that commie Krugman>
Click to expand...

So liberal they refuse to call torture torture or correct their inaccurate reporting on O'Keefe's lies! Wow!

Oh and Krugman, seriously..screw that guy for suggesting actual accountability and stuff.
 
The debt part was a joke, trying to say I've more than made up for my past freeloading by overconsuming now. :p

And apparently a large percentage of [H]s readership turn into trolls anytime the NYT is mentioned. Guess I'll stay away in the future.
 
I typically read past all opinions that are "reported" into these articles, helps me respect more news outlets. I wont be a subscriber to this but it doesn't piss me off the dude is pissed off about people exploiting the service.

OT: One of the biggest reason the nation is in horrible debt lies outside their mortgage, that is very easy to manage under certain means. The biggest problem is with cars, people have developed huge vanities and decided they are nothing if they aren't driving a gas guzzling, insurance raping, super expensive, bling'n car. I see tons of people around me complain about debt but are driving a $50,000 truck with zero reason to owning it. I want to go off on a tangent about their "concrete reasons" for owning said vehicle but that is too much for me to handle right now...
 
Outamyhead said:
I can get my news for free from Google, Yahoo, MSN, and BBC news, that's my way around the issue.
Click to expand...

You don't get bragging rights. You may read Msn and Yahoo(read this slow and condescending) But I read the New York Times(stick nose in the air).:D
 
Runningflame570 said:
So liberal they refuse to call torture torture or correct their inaccurate reporting on O'Keefe's lies! Wow!

Oh and Krugman, seriously..screw that guy for suggesting actual accountability and stuff.
Click to expand...

If your talking Paul Krugman that guys a twit have you read anything hes said about how to "fix" the economy or how to help "push" Americans into fuel sipping cars? Screw that Id rather listen to an old Milton Friedman lecture or some Thomas Sowell. Both have books that are also great btw. 97% of the time I see his pic in the editorial section it makes me want to puke. I have found a couple times I though he had sound reasoning but that was few and far in between crap crap ... and more crap.
 
Most of the national/global "news" is created by AP and/or Reuters and then re-published on newspapers.

The only real "exclusive" content that's nationally/globally relevant and available on NYT are opinion editorials, on various topics - politics, the economy, sports, fashion, celebrities, etc. Of course, there is stuff that is important locally - e.g., stories on the NY mayor, or the NYPD, or NY garbage strikes, or NY fine eating, etc, but I seriously doubt that non-New York residents are reading the NYT online to find out about water meter surcharges in the Bronx.

I suppose it'd be one thing if the NYT ran like a hard-core investigative reporting unit or something else exclusive and important, but they don't. Like most of the main-stream media they're just an establishment mouthpiece. They trend to the left, but there are plenty of other papers that also trend to the left, and as far as I can tell, none of these other papers plan on charging for access.

And personally I haven't been able to take the NYT seriously ever since Judith Miller and her slipshod and unethical reporting on WMDs.

Good luck to them on this plan. I don't have any horses in this race but I don't see this ending well for them.
 
the only way this would ever work was if you colluded with every other media outlet and all agreed to charge and all start doing it at the same time
 
The NY Times has a website? Who knew...?

One more reason to stick with the melting pot of BBC, MSNBC, CNN, FOX and AJE for "world" news stuff. Between all of those, the truth has to be out there... right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top