A bizarrely-staggered paywall will come into effect from March 28th, with readers getting 20 free articles a month. After that, it'll be $15 for a month's subscription to the website and phone app; $20 for the month's website use and iPad app use, and a steep $35 for using the website, phone app and iPad app. Newspaper subscribers receive unlimited digital use on all platforms except ereaders. Canadian readers are being charged from today. [BusinessInsider]
Finally, a Cartoon Brave Enough to Tell 10-Year-Olds That Having a Drink Will Kill Them and Everyone They Know
Though a paywall seems like a bad thing at first, I actually think it can be a good thing. Good journalism is suffering and I believe it's partly because they have reverted to this almost solely advertising driven formula. Not only have their revenues shrunken because of this, but their goal has shifted from good journalism to sensational journalism. More eyes equals more money.
Also, the advertising driven model is only making Google and other content aggregators money. The content creators are losing money even though more people then ever are reading their stories. And journalism isn't like music and movies where the people responsible for the content are the ones who mostly suffer. If journalism isn't funded we suffer, society suffers.
Good journalism is a necessity, it's what keeps corporations and politicians in check. Will I pay for they NYT? Probably not since the other sources are still free. However, when the other sources inevitably raise their own paywalls (or go bankrupt), I will pay for the NYT and not any of them because it went ahead and took the hit (and it will take a hit) when the others were too afraid to.