New York Times to begin charging for online content

[Facetious]

New York Times to charge for online content



The New York Times announced plans Thursday to charge the most frequent users of its website for access, drawing mixed reactions among media analysts on its odds of succeeding.

The plan, which begins March 28 for U.S. readers, marks a new effort by one of the nation's best-read newspapers to ensure its viability in the digital age. It follows similar efforts to build pay walls by the Augusta Chronicle in Georgia and the Dallas Morning News.

The Times, which has a Sunday circulation of more than 1.3 million and has more than 30 million monthly visitors to its website, becomes the biggest non-business newspaper to attempt charging for access. The Wall Street Journal and Financial Times have long required digital readers to pay.

Pay walls are going up amid growing concern over the future of newspapers. Combined print and online advertising revenue for newspapers slid 6.3 percent in 2010, reaching a 25-year-low, according to the Newspaper Association of America.
'Important step'

"It's an important step that we hope you will see as an investment in The Times, one that will strengthen our ability to provide high-quality journalism to readers around the world and on any platform," Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the Times' publisher, wrote in a note to readers.

continued

If this proves to be successful for the times, you can bet that other msm sources will follow along if there are earnings to be gained.

 

[meesterperfect]

i don't blame them.
its not like some bullshit tax, its charging for a service.
but it should be no more than the cost of a newspaper......actually less.

 

[Petra]

You pay a subscription for a paper to be delivered to your house, I don't see the problem with charging a subscription for the conveniance of seeing the same thing online. They still have to pay people to maintain the site and post all the content!

Of course where I'll have an issue is if they don't allow international customers to buy a subscription. Then I'll be a sad puppy.

 

[PJpenny]

the internet is taking over as the prefered place people get their news, why not make money for it

 

[maildude]

Encyclopedia Brittanica has been charging for years.

 

[busenbust]

damn the FT and WSJ also /

 

[Death-Proof-69]

doesn't make a difference to me as i don't read the ny times but i'm not surprised at all, costs money to run a site at the very least, plus the actual news business...seems reasonable

 

[doubleday]

I wouldn't mind them charging, if the price weren't so high ($20/ mo) and if the on-line content were as complete and as user-friendly as the paper version. Moreover, the on-line version has tons of ads.