Content...

I’m no special fan of the New York Times, I find most of their editorial content to be smug and arrogant… and those are traits I generally tend to value only in myself. Actually, I have no problem with smug if you have a reason to be, but from what I can see, the Times, like most other major newspaper publishers, is continuing to struggle to gain traction in an world that turns more and more towards the digital media for its news. I usually ignore news and commentary from the Times, but this article was special… it mentioned that the Gray Lady was trying to find a way to charge readers for its online content in an effort to stem the losses its taking in its print division.

Maybe some people will be willing to pay for an online subscription to the New York Times, or Washington Post, or Possumtown Gazette… but I’m pretty sure you’ve discovered a bad business model here boys. I can’t see how it is smart to start charging people for content that you have been giving away for years without substantially improving the product. It seems that to start charging, you would need to improve the service you are providing in some way… Otherwise, what’s to stop me from getting my highlights from Drudge, the AP, and the ten thousand or so other news sources that populated the interwebs?

This isn’t really a rant about the Times. I don’t want to see the end of good, independent journalism, but if a stalwart of print media like the Times can’t manage to survive the internet age, perhaps it should move aside and allow more responsive companies to take its place… or the government could give them a bailout. Either way.