The New York Times put two of today's op-ed columns (here and here) outside the subscriber wall. Would they have done that if the expected hundreds of thousands of people had coughed up the $50 annual fee?
UPDATE: Yesterday, Frank Rich's column was made available to everybody, too. Of course, giving Rich a wider audience might have been due to simple cruelty on the part of NYT's editors. (Hat tip, Mickey Kaus.)
Just keep Dowd and Krugman and Herbert behind the curtain. If they care at all for humanity.
Interesting. I never thought the subscriber based newspaper idea would work well, but it does look like the Times has come up with a reasonable model by offering it free to subscribers, but also offering a reasonable monthly rate for online readers. Will be interesting to see how it works out for them over the long haul.
The NYT is extorting the money for TimeSelect from us, either we pay to keep, Rich, Dowd, or Krugman behind the wall or we will be forced to read them for free.
The Times put up the wall to keep the content from discussion and analysis in the blogosphere.
Guess Oscar Wilde was right: "There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about – and that is NOT being talked about..."
