It's just a matter before New York Times would kill its foray into monetizing its popular website in creating the TimeSelect paid subscription service. So, it comes as no surprise when NYTimes ends this service.
While its columnists at NYTimes are popular, I don't think these days anyone would pay to read others' opinion online. Afterall, everyone (even dogs, if they could type) has an opinion, duly exposed in the millions of blogs out there. Nobody is going to pay to read yet some more opinions.
I would say, though, that NYT always has wonderful and indepth reporting. If I were to do research and study, I could use the archive library of NYT even if I have to pay. If NYT is not already doing that, maybe they should consider that (in order to make some bucks to help with the bottomline).
The attempt of NYTimes is quite different from, say, Wall Street Journal, which even I myself am considering signing up. When I pay, I want to see real, good quality content that is *hard news*, and WSJ fits my requirement. On top of that, I want to read it whenever and wherever I want it. I don't want to have to wait for the newspaper delivery at my door everyday. And I get to do my part for not wasting more trees, printing newspapers hardcopy. (I really hate it that people in the neighborhood would order their daily newspapers, just to have them thrown out, in their original plastic wrap. It's despicable.)
I must disclose my displeasure of Murdoch's takeover of Wall Street Journal. I really, really hope the newsroom of WSJ will not suffer. Otherwise, I'll vote with my feet.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment