How long before NYT dumps the TimesSelect program?

[BeyondThePale]

Does anyone actually subscribe to this service? Given their current troubles, I imagine that TimesSelect will soon be history.

[JuniorPlankton]

1. I find the idea ridiculous

It won't last....

[texpatriot2004]

2. Nope this household does NOT subscribe. That's ridiculous. n.t

[Canuckistanian]

3. I no longer even visit their website

I'm not giving them free hits anymore. I know, I won't make anyone tremble in their boots, but if enough people protest this, maybe there'll be a revelation in the NYT boardroom.

And I miss Krugman.

[BeyondThePale]

10. Me too (about missing Krugman)

[kskiska]

4. No one is happy about it. Looks doomed.

According to this snarkily written article:

NYT pundits lament pay-only Times Select

Editor & Publisher interviewed some of the New York Times columnists whose work is no longer accessible on the web without charge. They are not happy about the reduced readership, and note that in many overseas locations the $50 charge the Times imposes would pay for a lot more than on the Upper West Side.

For its part, the Times is still keeping the number of those paying a state secret. Which means it is an embarrassment, in all liklihood.

“I’m sad to lose an awful lot of readers, and a lot of readers in places like China and Pakistan who don’t have credit cards or the ability to sign up,” says Nicholas Kristof, a four-year Op-Ed columnist whose work appears twice weekly. “I want to be read, and this makes it much harder. But that is tempered by a concern that we come up with a business model to pay for my trips to Africa.”

The decline in earnings at the New York Times Company apparently weighs on the mind of Kristoff. And filing from Bayonne, New Jersey instead of Nairobi apparently doesn’t thrill him, either.

Thomas Friedman, another Op-Ed columnist who has a lot of foreign readership, admitted to being torn on the subject: “I want my newspaper to have a successful business platform. But the other side of me says that I have a lot of international readers in places like Egypt, where $50 could be their college tuition for a while.”Friedman stressed that reaching readers was among the most important aspects of the opinion pages, but added, “so is a good business model.” He credited the paper with trying something new, noting, “we had to dive into the pool to see what was there.”

more…
http://americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=3429

[mr_hat]

5. I get the Sunday Times, so I get Select no additional charge.

I enjoy both; doubt I'd pay for Select, though.

[kurth]

6. Dumb, dumb idea

Salon tried it.

Don't even bother to subscribe. Besides, somebody always posts Krugman on Usenet when he comes out.

[nvliberal]

7. Salon still has it.

Frankly, the bloggers think the only reason to read the NYT is for the pundits.

I can take them or leave them, thank you. I prefer to read the news and most other sections, which are free.

Despite a lot of lapses in the paper in recent years, there's a still a lot there worth reading.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

8. heck, I dumped NYT paper last week

I called and stated that so long as Judith Miller is associated with them, I would have nothing to do with their organization.

It was NOT the first call the NYT operater received in a similar vein.

[Ilsa]

9. Nope. We refused it on principle. eom

[MannyGoldstein]

11. I Subscribed

Other than a recent weird period of spineless running-dog-ism (Rich, Dowd, and Krugman excepted), the Times is a fantastic paper. A bit to the right for my taste (little coverage of socialized medicine or organized labor), but well written and less biased than other main-stream media. I'll gladly give them a buck a week in exchange for the information and enjoyment that I get in return