Slashdot Mirror
NY Times Op-Ed Page Goes Subscriber-Only
kevinatilusa writes "The New York Times has announced an expanded subscription service to be launched this September. Subscriptions will cost $49.95 per year and include access to both the Times archives (currently available on a pay-by-the-article basis) and to the paper's op-ed columnists (currently available for free, but probably not for long). The Times also posted a more detailed explanation (registration required) for their decision."
Wed May 18 02:52:27 CEST 2005 [1083]
Wed May 18 02:52:27 CEST 2005 [8110]
Does anyone actually care about the NY Times?
.
.
.
Didn't think so.
Wed May 18 03:06:15 CEST 2005 [2034]
Wed May 18 03:09:14 CEST 2005 [6528]
Wed May 18 03:29:06 CEST 2005 [2084]
Wed May 18 03:28:50 CEST 2005 [3041]
Wed May 18 03:32:05 CEST 2005 [6425]
From: CmdrTaco malda@slashdot.org
>
/. is going. There are certain critique of topics which are just off limits, these include but are not limited to: Google, Apple, BBC Licence fee, Wikipedia.
/. editors just treat it is a joke. So we need to reflect that in our marketing and the way we shape discussions on various topics. Some might call it censorship or micromanagment but I call it good practice.
Subject: Re: Slashdot censorship
Date: 15 May 2005 11:20:33 EST
To: XXXXXXXXX
Message-Id: XXXXXXXX
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I hear what you are saying but we need to manipulate where
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In the past it was the case that Slashdot was about Linux and Linux users for Linux users, but that simply isn't true anymore. The facts are that Linux has failed to capture the public imagination while Apple and Google have. Apple is cool now, and Linux quite frankly is something from the past and between you and me most of
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Similarly, Microsoft is not the monster it once was, these days with the XBox 360 it is pretty cool and we have a special relationship with Microsoft as we do with Apple and Google.
regards,
Rob
Wed May 18 03:41:39 CEST 2005 [2381]
Wed May 18 03:42:16 CEST 2005 [7718]
You are joking, right? If anything, they're worse. They're also more likely to promote crackpot conspiracy theories and publish stories with little or no evidence.
Yeah - I look to Newsweek to insure the stories backed by credible evidence ... oh wait.
Nope, they are not important at all. Unless of course your an America hating Liberal/Socialist/Democrat.
--
Yeah, bite me. I read tons here worse than this by you people about conservatives.
They are your papers of record if you regularly post in the DemocraticUnderground.org.
I think abandoning their obligation to report the truth in favour of overt partisan cheerleading and falsification of "news" has caused the papr more in reputation than this will
Suck my cock ignoramus.
Not to worry. The NYT's articles contain as much opinion as the op-eds.
who are the bloggers gonna make fun of now? i mean, we all have a blast fisking them on a weekly basis. oh well, we still have howard dean.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
Daily Kos is typically much more intelligent that MoDo. That is not saying much - I have houseplants that are more intelligent than MoDo (although perhaps not as good at rhyming).
But what about Nicholas Kristof or David Brooks or Thomas Friedman? How do you replace them?