Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sulzberger ponders taking NYTimes.com paid
Media Life Magazine ^ | January 8, 2005 | MediaLife Staff

Posted on 01/08/2005 12:52:08 PM PST by tvn

Will The New York Times web site follow the competing Wall Street Journal behind the cyber wall? Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. suggests as much in an interview with Business Week. He says that the company would consider making nytimes.com a pay site, forcing readers to pay for content that they now receive for free after registration. Sulzberger did not give a time frame for the change or commit to it for certain, telling the magazine, “It gets to the issue of how comfortable are we training a generation of readers to get quality information for free. That is troubling.” New York Times Digital, which also includes Boston.com, earned $17.3 million on $53.1 million in revenues during first-half 2004. Nytimes.com has 18 million unique users per month. Things aren’t as rosy in other sectors of the Times. The company reportedly will record a net income of $290 million for all of its properties, down 4 percent from last year.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: nytimes; pinchsulzberger
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
If Sulzberger carries through on his idea, he will likley be in for a rude awakening. Few can be expected to pay for access to the Times biased news reports.

The fact is that the Times 's Internet service is supported by advertising with little additional cost. Any subscription income would be an attempt to skim off additional revenues. However, as non-paying users drop so will ad revenues, causing a net loss to Sulzberger & Co.

1 posted on 01/08/2005 12:52:11 PM PST by tvn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tvn

I for one will not pay for the Times. As it is I only read the obituaries and the Editorial Page and if I have to I can do without both.
Punch and /or Pinch can just suck a cactus bush for all I care.


2 posted on 01/08/2005 12:54:08 PM PST by Captain Peter Blood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn

Great idea, Pinch. Do everything you can to reduce the number of people who view your site. I'm sure your advertisers will love you for it.


3 posted on 01/08/2005 12:55:43 PM PST by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn

Does this fool want to charge for free public libary use to make money for quality reading material??


4 posted on 01/08/2005 12:55:52 PM PST by handy old one (Never confuse the facts with the issues!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn

See also:

New York Times Mulls Charging Web Readers
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1316236/posts


5 posted on 01/08/2005 12:56:15 PM PST by Boundless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn

Hell, I won't even fill out their registration form, much less pay for their biased news reporting.


6 posted on 01/08/2005 12:59:38 PM PST by Beckwith (John, you said I was going to be the First Lady. As of now, you're on the couch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn
Are people familiar with the neat little site called Bugmenot?

I find myself using it frequently.

7 posted on 01/08/2005 1:00:48 PM PST by billorites (freepo ergo sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn

It won't work. The WSJ provides unique financial services that the NYT does not.


8 posted on 01/08/2005 1:04:46 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
Great idea, Pinch. Do everything you can to reduce the number of people who view your site. I'm sure your advertisers will love you for it.

I cancelled my NY Times subscription several years ago, there is simply no way I'd actually pay for their website.

I do and will pay for the Wall Street Journal's electronic edition in addition to the newspaper.

9 posted on 01/08/2005 1:12:25 PM PST by Sooth2222
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tvn

Sulzberger is a moron. The insiders here in Gotham all know this. He is pissing away his family's crown jewel, but he is able to control the firm's board, and can't be dislodged.


10 posted on 01/08/2005 1:20:50 PM PST by NativeNewYorker (Don't blame me. I voted for Sharpton.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn
Let's look at the pros and cons of this:

Pros:
(1) Users should pay - and they should pay more at peak times (whoops, sorry, that's what the toll road crowd wants for our freeways - wrong thread).
(2) Maybe some money will be made. There are always corporations that will pay, even if there are few idoits dumb enough.
(3) Maybe some loses will be avoided
(4) As mentioned elsewhere, the paper-version national edition can be canned. For people who still must somehow get their hands on the NYT words - the electronic subscription will be there only option.
(5) Others, like the LA Times, may follow. Then us freeloaders will have to pay to read their great literary works. (( like heck we will ))

Cons
(1) It will likely totally flop - the WSJ can get away with it only because they have excellent journalists and an outstanding editorial page (although some of that is free).
(2) The NYT will no longer have any real influence outside of its print edition - meaning that it becomes just another left-wing local rag - rather than a left-wing national rag.
(3) The free Internet version allows the NYT to reach many, many, more people in the middle, thus giving the NYT the chance to pull these people left.


The decision...

My prediction is that con #3 wins. The NYT will look at its mission to socialize the country trumping profits, just as CNN and the other left-wing TV networks do - giving Fox and wide open audience.
11 posted on 01/08/2005 1:35:11 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn

1st JOKE of 2005. 1/08/05. Snore


12 posted on 01/08/2005 1:53:00 PM PST by Waco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn
are we training a generation of readers to get quality information for free.

ROFLMAO!!!!!

13 posted on 01/08/2005 1:54:40 PM PST by Hildy ( To work is to dance, to live is to worship, to breathe is to love.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beckwith
Hell, I won't even fill out their registration form, much less pay for their biased news reporting.

LOL. I'm with you.

If something is interesting enough, some intelligent FReeper will figure out a way to tell us about it.

14 posted on 01/08/2005 1:56:31 PM PST by geedee (American by birth. Texan by choice and attitude. Conservative by God. Disabled by hubris.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tvn

The National Enquirer is not for free, why should their site be?


15 posted on 01/08/2005 1:56:48 PM PST by big bad easter bunny (Whats more to say?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn

I'm for anything that helps put the NYT out of business.

We should write them and tell them what a great idea it is and that we would be happy to pay for their news!


16 posted on 01/08/2005 2:00:26 PM PST by Owl558 (Please excuse my poor spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tvn

I expect most on-line newspapers will charge for access eventually. A standardized "micropayment" system could keep access affordable for most users.


17 posted on 01/08/2005 2:16:15 PM PST by HAL9000 (Spreading terrorist beheading propaganda videos is an Act of Treason!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Captain Peter Blood

Wow! you READ the NYT editorials?!

You must enjoy pain and boredom.

I can tell you what liberal NYT position will be on almost any issue by glancing at the subject. They are that predictable.

I mean, do they ever say anything Interesting or insightful?

Like others I will never pay, since most Newspapers in the country reprint or copy the NYT news articles.


18 posted on 01/08/2005 2:46:24 PM PST by rcocean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: big bad easter bunny

> The National Enquirer is not for free,
> why should their [NYT] site be?

tNE is more credible than the NYT,
so the product is worth more :-)


19 posted on 01/08/2005 2:48:16 PM PST by Boundless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tvn

It's about time the NYTimes.com starts charging money??

After all, with all that great fiction I'd gladly pay twice what I pay now just to have their stories (and I emphasize the word stories) available at my beck and call.

No, make that three times. Yep. I'll gladly pay thrice what I pay now just to have access to their stuff.

I might even pay four or five times as much as I do now, just to make sure I never miss anything....


20 posted on 01/08/2005 2:56:26 PM PST by Edit35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson