Tuesday, September 18, 2007
|
|
Our Long National Nightmare is Over
|
|
Posted by:
Dean Barnett at
9:54 AM
|
Times Select is dead! Or it will be dead by the end of the week. No longer will a breathless online nation be denied the pithy prose stylings of Paul Krugman and Maureen Dowd unless they anted up 8 bucks a month. There will be no more Sundays where Americans who lack the resources to pay for Times Select will vainly ponder the question, “I wonder what movie Frank Rich compared the Bush administration to this week.” And yes, once again and at last, the breathtaking originality of Tom Friedman will be available for free to the unwashed masses who eschewed the siren song of Times Select.
You know what bothers me about the whole Times Select misadventure? It’s not that I’ve had to go the last few years without reading Paul Krugman. I’ve survived that ordeal surprisingly well. And it’s not the institutional arrogance/stupidity that the Times displayed in actually thinking that people would shell out real money to read the entirely unoriginal content of its op-ed page. And it’s not even that the Times’ business model had it completely bass-ackwards – there’s loads of opinion for free on the internet. The Times’s potential value-add that people may actually have paid for was its hard news, not the wheezing gas-bags who populate its opinion pages.
What really bugs me is that this Edsel of an online adventure will convince a lot of people (people that matter like venture capitalist people) that you can’t make money in selling online content. Many analysts will conclude, “If the New York Times couldn’t do it, it can’t be done.” This couldn’t be more wrong. Just because no one has created a profitable model for selling on-line content yet doesn’t mean it won’t happen eventually. And inevitably.
If there was an online magazine or newspaper that had James Lileks, Mark Steyn, Bill Kristol, Andrew Ferguson, John Podhoretz, Bill Simmons, Terry Teachout and Michael Yon contributing daily, I’d pay for it. A lot of other people would, too. The Times’ big failure wasn’t in thinking they could sell on-line opinion. Their failure was in thinking they could sell crappy and unoriginal on-line opinion.
Someone will someday realize that you can build a much better mousetrap than the Times did. And that person will make a lot of money.
Compliments? Complaints? Contact me at Soxblog@aol.com.
|
|
|
..Suppressor.Developed from the recent success of OxyClinton.Now that MoDo is once again Free... we'll need massive supplies.Naw..still won't read the cretinous Dowd & Krugman. |
|
The Intergalactic Medicine Show (www.intergalacticmedicineshow.com) seems to be doing really well in selling online content. They do several things really well:
1 - they keep the price low. Low enough that I don't feel bad telling my friends to get their own subscription
2 - Famous author. Orson Scott Card writes a short story for each issue. I got hooked because i wanted to read these stories, and i ended up enjoying the other stories.
3 - They choose really good stories to be included in the issues.
But I know, that's sci-fi and not news, but I think that the same could be said for the news. |
|
|
Ms Dowd, I have never paid for it in my life. |
|
|
Is that someone's grandmom? |
|
tooth. But, I agree she is kind of a MILF. Eternity would be defined as the length of time from consumation to departure.
But, I digress...
The best Paul Krugman column of all time was the one he executed on the eve of the 2004 Election, wherein he panted and rubbed his feculent front feet together, predicting a high voter turnout, and a concomitant dimocrat victory. As well all know, Paul al Krugman was correct on the former and so so so wrong on the latter.
Are any of the dimocrat gyno-chimps who lurk in this bastion of free expression still exercised, ennervated or aggravated about Ohio-2004? How about Florida-2000? |
|
|
The guys who figured out a way to make selling online content quite profitable, and a long time ago at that, just aren't selling opinion, or G-rated content, I'm afraid. |
|
|
Although I enjoy blogging and commenting at others' blogs, I really don't think that is the future model because all it does it create echo chambers to get trapped in. It would really help if the "professionals" became less partisan and agenda-driven and were intellectually honest about "the facts". If there is one thing I've learned at TH, it is that there some very well-informed bloggers and commenters here but they get little traffic at their own blogs and get lost in all of the childish shouting and insults at the high-traffic blogs. It's like a non-stop "Tastes great! Less filling!" barroom argument where neither side ever EVER gives an inch. No one is persuading anyone and everyone is insulted eventually. We need a more intelligent model where it is intimidating to offer a potentially stupid comment. TH is not exactly thought provoking. Just provoking. |
|
|
|
|
the last time I saw a leg that skinny there was a message tied to it. |
|
Many of us are entrenched in our positions. That is human nature. Any psychologist can tell you that once you lock onto a thought, it is far more difficult to change that position again.
But what people say around here definitely affects how I think about things. You have done it to me with your arguments. Dean does it too. Occasionally the debate decends to WWW levels, but there are some pretty good commentators here.
|
|
The Boston Globe is a partisan yellow rag. But all news papers are like that to some extent, Pultizer was a rag merchant and it is fitting journalism's highest award is named after him.
The New York Times thinks it is better than that. Well, it is not. A few glossy real estate spreads in the Sunday section does not make the Times an honest woman. |
|
Photographs best from a distance, with a filter over the lens. Check out this shot: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/09/blogosphere-1-n.html
A little too much realism.
Becareful what you wish for S/A85 and "Dangerous" Dave. Without the make up in the morning you might in in for a very rude suprise.
And before someone accuses me of sexism, I am forgiving of body imperfections and the effect of age on women. There is just something about Maureen Dowd that creeps me out, like she is trying to suck the life force out of you.
Then again, some people dig that! |
|
|
The move to end TimeSelect is a good one, while I pay for The New York Times as an actual paper, I won't pay for internet access. I think it should generally be free with advertisements making any revenue. Of course they should have the right to charge, but as a consumer I'm not buying. As for Ms. Dowd, her writing is some of the best, and I always make sure to read it. |
|
|
She looks like a test pilot for a broom factory. |
|
The guy is a living, breathing example of why nepotism is a bad idea.
|
|
that they have alienated half of their potential subscriber base...
Never forget that... Your friends will only buy one subscription each... If you're neutral on sensitive issues--as "professional journalists are supposed to be--you don't suffer the catastrophic losses the Dixie Chix did...
Unfortunately for MSM, their "reporters" desired to vent their spleens in the middle of the news. This has DRIVEN the success of alternate sources... and the exodus of subscribers and advertisers to sources perceived as more "fair and balanced"... |
|
|
The fat former drama critic who waded way beyond his depth when he turned to writing about other subjects would look even worse in this pose. Legs as thin as Maureen's wheels but with a Pudding Boy body. |
|
Joe,
When are you going to start a blog. I come here to read the comments. Most of the time I don't even bother to read the title post. Dean just constantly repeats himself, he is easy to predict, and boring. I wish you would start a blog. I bet Phil would agree. |
|
|
Only posted one article that I know of. Pretty good one, even persuaded me somewhat. |
|
Like the good socialists they are the NYT made a huge mistake in offering the print edition free at first. If you offer people something for free and then start charging them for "the best" content, they will revolt.
WSJ never made this mistake. they always charged for the online version (Barron's too) and have steadily built a profitable growth engine on the web.
http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=34388
The redesigned Journal has been well received by both advertisers and readers, with research showing 80% of subscribers prefer the new edition. Improvements in print/online integration made in January have benefited the Journal franchise as a whole, with growth in both the print and online products. During the first quarter of 2007, paid subscriptions to the Online Journal grew 20% to 931,000, up from last year’s 774,000.
|
|
>>> Dean just constantly repeats himself, he is easy to predict, and boring.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So should we ask, why are you still here? LOL |
|
|
I'd start a blog just to ban people like Ray. |
|
I'm just not.
I'm going to resist.
Really.
I mean, I can't.
That is, I can't help but wonder...
have S/A85 and "Dangerous" Dave considered that, uh, 'being' with Miss "MoDo" would make them, uh, you know...
Sorry.
|
|
Maureen Doud reads Men's Heath Magazine?
I was listening to ESPN Radio a few weeks ago and one of the hosts totally ridiculed Men's Heath Magazine.
The other host was clueless.
One was essentially saying, "Like, Dude, it's full of guys with their shirts off whereas REAL men's mags are full of women with their tops off. Men's Heath is a gay mag."
The other host was like, "Uh, no. That can't be right. It's about articles about all kinds of stuff."
On the other hand, Maxim is a MAN'S magazine. No question about that.
I was beginning to worry about Maureen, but maybe she is just trying to be politically correct.
If Maureen IS bi, of course (standard disclaimer required here), there's nothing wrong with that.
|
|
I did do a Townhall blog called "Cherry Picking Experts" when Dean and I disagreed over "enhanced interrogation techniques" also known as Geneva Convention violations. Dean was for them. I was against them. Dean said I was cherry picking experts when I referred to Col. Herrington (who Hugh interviewed on the subject).
I only did one post as a back up of what I was arguing with Dean, but given how Townhall's server kicks out your registration from time to time (and I also got banned once for calling Hugh a mix of a donkey and the center of a doughnut for bringing up Fred Thompson's cancer again--even though I used ** for the donkey part)--my name does not link to the blog any more.
But thank you for comments. |
|
|
...in seeing some factual data on hits for NYT.com pages including those columnists who were hidden behind the "Select" iron curtain, comparing pre-Select numbers with Select numbers and then post-Select numbers. I'm betting that they lost a significant number of hits by going "underground", and that they'll either regain very little of that lost audience, or perhaps will even lose more, since it's clearly waving the white flag of surrender (the one they keep wanting US troops to wave in Iraq). |
|
|
As phillyfanatic, I was on the NYTimes oped blog for nearly 4 years. Then, they decided to charge so that the huge conservative readership and writers would stop blasting the socialism-liberalism-pacifism of Paul, Mo, Keller, et al. If you love to see the horrors of leftist thinking that think that their elitism, snobbery, and outrageous socialism is really the only way to live, rule, and decide for all others, go on the Times' op-ed blog. It is scary but revealing.Safire is gone but the pansy Rich, the snob Mo, the nutter Paul will all give you some time to use that Zantac and have you thinking that Pravada is back in fashion. |
|
What's happening to the Wicked Witch of the Times when she's not wearing her red shoes? Where they buried under the house of cards that the NYT became?
Oh well, never read her columns before and don't plan to start now. So, DB will have to carry another burden for us folks and read the WWofTT's diatribes himself. Pity!
|
|
Amen!
The Jayson Blair Times is not collapsing because it is liberal. It is collapsing because it is badly written. THey get the stories wrong, issue mealy mouthed retractions on page 37, and simply allowed the entire paper to become an editorial page.
The Wall Street Journal is doing well not because it is conservative, but because it is well written. The editorial pages are brilliant, but the paper itself covers hard news.
http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/06/23/the-collapse-of-the-jayson-blair-times-palestinian-style/
Respectfully,
eric |
|
They had just about become irrelevant. I hadn't had an ulcer in months over another flagrant stretch of the truth from Paul "I Coulda Been Ben Bernenke" Krugman.
Still, I cherish that legendary Nov. 2 column of his, where he got a peek at Kerry's polls showing him a two-point winner on Nov. 1 and so he just waxed on and on about how smart the electorate was and how the American people were going to ultimately make everything right. Then Bush wins by more than a hanging chad and Krugman's apoplexy is so prefound he must go on a previously announced but "long-planned" mid-winter sabbatical from writing.
Still, they may be like Salon - by locking up their content too long the fickle online consumer has found their outlet somewhere else.
However, if I were the ad guy for DailyKos I'd be worried about losing eyeballs to the NYT. |
|
republican "news" = Fox
Democrats = NY Times
... the funny thing is that you're proud of the affiliation!
ps: they misogyny in most of these comments is a nice touch. |
|
The lefties who rail against Fox never seem to point out any inaccuracies on its part; they just don't like the tone. Other than getting the Obama "madrassa" story wrong a few months ago, it's hard to think of a major factual screwup by Fox. They certainly haven't had a Jayson Blair moment. When I watch Fox, which isn't very often, they seem to balance the conservative opinions with those from the liberal side.
But you have a point about the misogynistic comments. A good rule would be, any male who's posting irrelevant comments about a woman's attractiveness ought to be required to post a picture of himself, so readers can consider the source. |
|
|
IraqSlogger WAS a fairly decent place to go for a great aggregation blog of news, culture and personalities using a variety of international sources and Iraqi citizens. From the fevered brain of Eason Jordan no less but even with biases, it provides a lot in its breadth and depth. I actually might pay a couple dollars a month, I'm a voluntary subscriber to Bill Roggio (LongWarJournal.org) but there's like IraqSlogger. Victory Caucus certainly never seems to update or grow. But IraqSlogger has gone from zero to $59-$79 a month! Is anyone going to pay that? |
|
NYC DOGG writes:
NYC Dogg:
You re the moron: the NY Times shares have dropped from $50 to $20 the past 4 yrs. Shares drop when readership and advertising rates drop.
So in a desperate attempt to recoup lost revenue, The Times Select was created...and failed. Readership and ad rates continue to drop because less and less people want to pay for the left wing trash found in the NY Times. Get it??
On the other hand, 2 years ago, Michael Yon created a website that has grown into a highly successful online magazine attracting a growing global audience by providing online content comprised of evocative agendaless dispatches supplemented with incredible photos and videos. His reach and influence extends well beyond the cyber world.
He is entirely reader-supported.
|
|
NYC Dogg:
You re the moron: the NY Times shares have dropped from $50 to $20 the past 4 yrs. Shares drop when readership and advertising rates drop.
So in a desperate attempt to recoup lost revenue, The Times Select was created...and failed. Readership and ad rates continue to drop because less and less people want to pay for the left wing trash found in the NY Times. Get it??
On the other hand, 2 years ago, Michael Yon created a website that has grown into a highly successful online magazine attracting a growing global audience by providing online content comprised of evocative agenda-free dispatches supplemented with incredible photos and videos. His reach and influence extends well beyond the cyber world.
He is entirely reader-supported. |
|
|
|