New York Times to Charge $15 a Month for Access to Newspaper’s Website (Bloomberg)

[chill_wind]

New York Times to Charge $15 a Month for Access to Newspaper’s Website
By Brett Pulley -


New York Times Co. (NYT) said it will begin charging readers who don’t subscribe to its namesake newspaper on Mar. 28 for content on the publication’s website.

Times Co. will charge $15 every four weeks for unlimited access to the site from a computer or mobile phone, the company said in a statement today. A package for access online and through the paper’s tablet-computer application will run $20 every four weeks and access from any device will be $35.

Times Co., based in New York, is looking to its website to bolster revenue as print advertising and circulation sales fall. The company’s revenue slid 1.9 percent last year to $2.39 billion, the fourth year of decline. (snip)

Non-subscribers will still be allowed to read 20 stories for free each month, and access the NYTimes.com home page and section fronts, the company said.

more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-17/new-york-times-to-charge-15-a-month-for-access-to-newspaper-s-website.html

[somone]

1. Good luck with that

[TheWraith]

14. + 1,000.

I have the sneaking feeling that most of these paywall systems are gross and utter failures.

[in_cog_ni_to]

2. So much for that online paper. n/t

[LARED]

3. NYT's; soon to join this club

[BklynThirtyThree]

4. bwahahaha

$15 every 4 weeks? not a chance this will work

[madinmaryland]

5. They tried that several years ago and it was an epic fail. Well, I guess

I will read four articles a month (the Krugman Op-eds). Krugman's Op-eds are not "stories". If I want stories, I will read David Brooks' crap.

[physioex]

6. Do us a favor and make it $1500...EOM

[elfin]

7. I subscribe to the Sunday only

Today got an Email that I would have full access because of this.

I, too, think this will fail. I am not sure, but it appears that if a reader comes to the online via another site, they can read many more articles than the allotted minimum.

[Roselma]

8. We'll still be able to read NY Times articles. Explanation:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/ny-times-announces-paywall-which-google-will-help-you-dig-underneath/

Plus, I think we'll be able to follow links to articles by news aggregator websites like HuffPo.

[999998th word]

9. Huffpo? not a chance.

[Roselma]

10. It's not just HuffPo per the linked article. You'll also

be able to link from search engines like Google.

[jannyk]

11. I see dead newspapers

stupid fuckers already tried this once - duh

[salvorhardin]

12. What's really idioitic

Is they're putting the blogs behind the paywall too.

[no_hypocrisy]

13. NYT tried to charge for online content years ago and it didn't work out.

[chill_wind]

15. Reminds me of the predictions in that flash anim called EPIC

I've linked this one before, but I see they have an updated "2015" version.


(Looks the NYT might be pulling a little ahead of schedule)

"In the year 2014 the New York times has gone offline

The Fourth Estate's fortunes have waned

What happened to the news?

and what is EPIC?"

http://epic.makingithappen.co.uk/

[Rex]

16. Well it was a good CIA rag, time to close up shop.

Things go out of business all the time around here.

[rainbow4321]

17. Dallas Morning News just started that, too

If you subscribe for home delivery, you can still read their website, if you don't get home delivery than they want to charge you like $17/MONTH to read the majority of their online articles. They used to have pretty robust comment sections with their articles that online readers would use...now it looks like their "pay to read" articles have maybe a handful of comments (you could tell cuz they keep a comment counter by each article that you can see even if you can't read the article).

They promised to keep "breaking news" headlines free---big deal..kind of hard to follow up on those articles once any follow up article becomes a "pay to read".