The coolest place on the internet, according to this tagline.
AskArchiveFAQ

March 20, 2012
NYT tightens the paywall vice: Make those 10 articles count. (Though we admit that it’s totally one of the few newspapers in the country worth subscribing to.)

NYT tightens the paywall vice: Make those 10 articles count. (Though we admit that it’s totally one of the few newspapers in the country worth subscribing to.)

10:45 // 2 years ago
April 6, 2011

The NYT doesn’t like poor people, apparently

cheatsheet:

Audience member at Columbia Journalism School to Arthur Sulzberger, New York Times publisher: “How will low-income residents now access The Times at home?”

Sulzberger: “Just translate that question to print. How will low-income people get access to The New York Times in print?”

Holy crap that’s elitist.

11:08 // 3 years ago
March 28, 2011
Protip: The NYT’s paywall hits today. Go here to save ca$h.
For the first four weeks, you too can get access to the NYT’s vast supply of Brooklyn-discovery stories and trend pieces about trends nobody knew existed — for just a dollar. And be quick about it. The NYT’s paywall hits us plebes at around 2 p.m. EST. source

For the first four weeks, you too can get access to the NYT’s vast supply of Brooklyn-discovery stories and trend pieces about trends nobody knew existed — for just a dollar. And be quick about it. The NYT’s paywall hits us plebes at around 2 p.m. EST. source

10:10 // 3 years ago
March 26, 2011
New York Times’ paywall: Favoring the mobile Web over apps?
The fine print in the NYT’s paywall: Have you been wondering to yourself, “Who the heck would pay $260 extra to subscribe to the iPad version of the New York Times?” So have a lot of people. From a distance, the price plan makes little sense and makes the paper nearly as expensive as the dead-tree version (which costs $770 a year for the seven-days-a-week edition outside of NYC). But Poynter’s Damon Kiesow has a really interesting take on the matter which a lot of people haven’t considered: What if the Times wants to discourage mobile app use by pricing them at a premium, specifically with the iPad version? (above pic taken by Robert Scoble — yes, that’s the man’s hand)
$385 yearly cost of a weekday subscription to the Times 
$195 yearly cost of a Web-only Times subscription
$260 yearly cost to add mobile to the Web
$455 yearly cost to add tablet use to the bunch source
» What this all means to you: Now, if you’ve ever used an iPad, it’s pretty clear that the New York Times Web site is as good, if not better than, the NYT iPad app, at least for now. And if they want to further emphasize the tablet-y nature of the iPad, they already have that in the form of Times Skimmer. Furthermore, Apple doesn’t take a 30 percent cut out of Web-based subscriptions. Damon Kiesow’s perfectly apt reasoning, then, is that the NYT is trying to de-emphasize the App Store by pricing people out of that direction. And you know what? He’s right. The NYT Web site will work fine on the iPad. There is an advantage to using NYT’s app on your cell phone, so that’s kept at a more reasonable cost, but the NYT’s plan to focus on the Web over the app? Sneaky.
Follow ShortFormBlog

The fine print in the NYT’s paywall: Have you been wondering to yourself, “Who the heck would pay $260 extra to subscribe to the iPad version of the New York Times?” So have a lot of people. From a distance, the price plan makes little sense and makes the paper nearly as expensive as the dead-tree version (which costs $770 a year for the seven-days-a-week edition outside of NYC). But Poynter’s Damon Kiesow has a really interesting take on the matter which a lot of people haven’t considered: What if the Times wants to discourage mobile app use by pricing them at a premium, specifically with the iPad version? (above pic taken by Robert Scoble — yes, that’s the man’s hand)

  • $385 yearly cost of a weekday subscription to the Times
  • $195 yearly cost of a Web-only Times subscription
  • $260 yearly cost to add mobile to the Web
  • $455 yearly cost to add tablet use to the bunch source

» What this all means to you: Now, if you’ve ever used an iPad, it’s pretty clear that the New York Times Web site is as good, if not better than, the NYT iPad app, at least for now. And if they want to further emphasize the tablet-y nature of the iPad, they already have that in the form of Times Skimmer. Furthermore, Apple doesn’t take a 30 percent cut out of Web-based subscriptions. Damon Kiesow’s perfectly apt reasoning, then, is that the NYT is trying to de-emphasize the App Store by pricing people out of that direction. And you know what? He’s right. The NYT Web site will work fine on the iPad. There is an advantage to using NYT’s app on your cell phone, so that’s kept at a more reasonable cost, but the NYT’s plan to focus on the Web over the app? Sneaky.

Follow ShortFormBlog

10:18 // 3 years ago