Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011

Everybody Wants to Jump That Paywall

I miss the old days, when you could beat the New York Times pay wall by just stealing your neighbor's copy from their doorstep.Tue Mar 22 19:51:59 via TweetDeck

The change was supposed to be revolutionary and complete. Everyone would parachute in and, pow, regime change, resulting in a satisfying economic climate. But here we are, skirmishing at the border of the New York Times paywall. Everybody wants to climb over it or tunnel under it! People are like German Shepherds, they just love a challenge. Looks like the Times is going to be happily sniping intruders from their towers. (TOO MUCH?)

20 Comments / Post A Comment

dntsqzthchrmn (#2,893)

"It is indeed a great wall."

Aatom (#74)

Beating a dead tree.

dado (#102)

Even without Frank Rich and Deborah Solomon? I'll be damned.

heroofthebeach (#2,280)

Who would snipe German Shepherds? A low blow, indeed.

Bobby Womack (#4,074)

Not to sound holier-than-thou, but is nobody willing to pay? I used to get the Weekend edition on Saturday, and dropped it when they put out the iphone app. I'd gladly pay $18 a month for access to the best newspaper in the US.

Bobby Womack (#4,074)

Seriously, my cable/internet bill is waaay higher than that.

Mackenzie Kelly (#8,235)

Amen — cheap at twice the price

jfruh (#713)

Part of my irritation is with the extreme not-matching-up of the prices. Did you know that if you want the iPad/iPhone/Web version of the subscription, it's actually *cheaper* to subscribe to the paper version (a print subscription includes all digital) than it is to just go digital?

atlasfugged (#4,481)

An intrepid Canadian has already found a way through the paywall:


riggssm (#760)

So … (bragging?) I was one of the 200,000 invited to a complimentary subscription through the end of '11 (thanks to a sponsorship by Lincoln).

I'm not sure what that says about my geek level, but I like free things!

I thought that was spam!

Mork el Pork (#8,293)

I took it to mean that all my procrastination is finally not procrastination

dntsqzthchrmn (#2,893)

Yes, I figured that since I too received that offer there was no WAY it could be exclusive.

WaPo has extended their iPad paywall shift for me a couple of times. (Shades of AOL!)

While the FT, and I SUBSCRIBE to the print edition, wants me to pay DOUBLE to read their Lex columns online. (And I've considered it.)

TimChuma (#9,158)

I'd be happy to pay, but not $180 per year which is it what it works out to. You could get three magazine subscriptions for that. I guess I won't be buying any new books or going to see any movies that they write about either now.

caw_caw (#5,641)

I wish I had a dollar for every writer, designer and creator complaining this week about having to pay what the Times thinks it is actually worth.

Mr. B (#10,093)

I was all set to cough up $15 a month, but now, thanks to Lincoln, maker of cars for old people, I'm all set till 2012.

This is apparently for the biggest NYT news junkies who don't subscribe to the print edition. I never thought so much time wasted scrolling through every single letter to the editor in the Sunday Book Review would pay off quite like this.

Don't they tell junkies "First one's free!"?

Great Homes & Destinations will be the death of me.

carpetblogger (#306)

I should be paid to read Tom Friedman and Maureen Dowd and David Brooks.

dntsqzthchrmn (#2,893)


Post a Comment