"If you are coming to NYTimes.com from another Web site and it brings you to our site to view an article, you will have access to that article and it will not count toward your allotment of free ones."
Wow! Fabulous! I certainly am willing to subscribe to the NYT myself. My problem was that I want to read things I can blog and I don't want to link to things that my readers will need to pay for. But if my link magically makes the article free, then the paid NYT will be better for me. This blog will function as a portal to the free NYT.
January 22, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
The NYT daily link page (which can be sorted by keyword, title, author, topic, etc.) is already in preparation, and will actually make us less likely to go directly to NYT site, because the NYT link site will have done the skimming of content for us.
Google could do this. Or Yahoo. Or any old yahoo.
So much for monetizing.
You're a good woman.
Whether this gets you a place in Heaven is solely dependent on whether St. Peter and the gang at the Admissions Department regard Times access as a necessarily good thing.
I agree with edutcher, but you are clever too. I hope it works out that way. I like some of the NYT content and that would be a good way to access it occasionally.
I'm the van wagon and Althouse is driving.
Sometimes is just impossible to avoid a pothole.
I like some of the science related articles in the NYT but for the rest only when Ann links to something with a comment or question that interests me. So good business asusual.
Including my bad typing
Free is too much.
I would hope they have some sort of pay scheme in place to prevent robot sites which will just link to NYT stories from working.
If they were smart, they'd charge more to bloggers that want to link to stories (50 cents/day or something, something near but less than their subscription price). Not enough to kill blogger interest, but enough to stop robot sites.
If they were REALLY smart, they'd make links to the stories unique to the blogger (some hex values in the URL, voila!) to make it easier to find robot linking sites.
If they were really, really smart, any stories from their paper would be available free after a year or so (free archive searches), so that people would be able to link to historical stories and old NYTimes editorials and prognostications.
"Free is too much"
I agree. They should be paying us.
wv: hyman. Well, you figure it out.
I was brought in for a while to the NYT digital division as an advisor, perhaps 10-11 years ago.
The mentality drove me crazy. It "wasn't invented here" was invented there.
Now, as predicted then, the online version would kill the paper version...well here we are and 5 years ago when this could have been eased into and without a loss of readership which is going to happen, they wouldn't be in what will be their death-throes dance.
This is beyond stupid.
Perhaps 10-11 years ago, the NYT started to go downhill.
Wow, 11 comments. Your audience is really excited about this...
These details make it sound like the NYT has cold feet.
Fen:
Hahaha. No one could have said that any better.
I've noticed the Althouse commenters do not get too excited by her Dylan posts either.
x
Sorry about that. Bad typing skills. I'm not entirely clear what the NYT business model is, unless they just want to track internet linkage and readership.
So in other words: Althouse is the Gatekeeper. Althouse will decide what free articles she thinks are noteworthy, and then filter the articles through her site as she sees fit.
Hey Reader: either you trust the judgment of Althouse, or you don't get to read (free) NYT articles !
Post a Comment