Cool. The New York Times online has gone back to free content.
I can read Maureen Dowd again.
When they went to paid for their premium content a year or two ago, I said bad idea and not only because I could no longer read Maureen. I knew then that the trend was not towards more paid content it was towards less. ABC news, CNN and others (AOL, anyone?) figured that out before the Times did but why couldn't they have paid better attention and realized it was a poor choice in the first place? Don't they read the news?
I hated the Times Online when they'd tease you with a line or two of a good story or opinion piece then say *buzzer sound* gotta pay to read more. And of course, I didn't pay. I'm going to pay my Internet fee, my blog fee, and then paid news content? Uh, no thanks. You guys do the work and go get yourselves some advertisers--for me to click past.
Comments