-

January 07, 2005

NY Times Online Going Subscription?

Apparently the NY Times is considering charging an access fee. Several thoughts:

  • Perhaps they should try a tip jar.
  • While this has worked for the Wall Street Journal, that's a business resource with unique information -- there are many other sources for the Times' information. The London Times abandoned subscriptions after a short time.
  • I suspect that advertisers have little interest in pay sites, due to the massively decreased eye-traffic.
  • Walling up the internet with pay barriers is probably not a good thing.
  • This will make CNN very happy indeed

Posted by Kevin Murphy at January 7, 2005 12:47 PM | TrackBack
Comments

There's very little in the NYTimes that is truly unique to that paper. Being so influential among newspapers means that its stories and slants are picked up by other news orgs.

For all the TV ads I get around here, there's very little in the NYTimes that I can't see elsewhere... but there really is stuff in the Wall Street Journal that I won't see anywhere else. I also used to have an online subscription to the Economist, for the same reason. (I get the WSJ in dead tree format only, as it's my subway reading.)

So basically, I completely agree with you.

Posted by: meep at January 7, 2005 01:04 PM

I sub to the online WSJ, and get the Economist in the mail (which gives me free online access). I might spend $10/yr on the NYTimes, but not much more than that. I suspect they get as much in ad revenue.

I still think a tip jar would be a better idea, as they keep the ad revenue, but it'd probably offend their dgnity.

Posted by: Kevin Murphy at January 7, 2005 01:44 PM