TimesSelect: Will It Change The Way The Web Works?

By: Vaughn Ververs
Topics: Media Issues

They don't call it the news business for nothing but don't try telling that to a blogosphere up in arms over the launch of the New York Times' new premium content service, TimesSelect. For $7.95 per month, or $49.95 for an entire year, anyone who doesn't already subscribe to the paper can now access its op-ed columnists, archives and other material. Of course up until now you could get them for free, thus the animosity from the Web.

A quick glance at the blog search engine Technorati shows this was one of the most-discussed topics yesterday and a look at some of the reaction is less-than favorable on any number of levels. It's not surprising. After all, free speech is the blogosphere standard.

It all does seem to be a ponderous move from the Times. On the one hand, the paper's columnists – Maureen Dowd, David Brooks, Thomas Friedman and Paul Krugman among others – are often the lynchpins for the debates that happen on the Web. Despite all the attacks on the mainstream media, it's folks like this who still largely set the agenda – or at least supply the ammunition. But will an audience used to getting it for free really start to pay? Doesn't the paper stand to gain more from promoting its voices than from hiding them? And will they be able to keep material from getting out, if not in full, then at least in part?

As good as it is, I wouldn't want to pay to read Public Eye – or any other blog for that matter. And it seems the trend in Internet news is toward more free content, especially video, supported by advertising and the move by the Times flies in the face of that. Of course, it's somewhat hypocritical for me to join in on the Times-bashing. After all, my last job was for a publication that charged substantially more than $49.95 a year!

We'll be curious to follow the debate over this and the future success of TimesSelect. Will you subscribe?

10 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment


by tomgrey2 September 21, 2005 7:57 PM EDT: I won\'t pay, even if good. Advertizing should be enough, including Google Ads, etc. I agree that it\'s good to have some big media with resources to pay professional reporters; but many \"facts\" are available to non-pros, and there should be a bit more effort to collate and edit what\'s already available.; Reply to this comment


by webdepot September 21, 2005 11:58 AM EDT: Well, it may not change the way the web works, but it\'s changed the way I work.. I just unsubscribed from the Times headline news email I got every morning. I\'m not about to pay to read someone\'s opinion. What I will miss is the facts that accompanied those opinions that helped me formulate my own opinions.. I guess the Bush spin machine just got another boost.; Reply to this comment


by September 21, 2005 11:49 AM EDT: This is a nonissue. All the op-ed columnists can be read for free (legally) a few days after they appear on the NYT site. Just look for the papers that carry them as syndicated columnists and have free registrations. Someone\'s already done this and has a convenient page with all the links: http://www.johntabin.com/neverpayretail/; Reply to this comment


by anglican40 September 20, 2005 11:14 PM EDT: now i chew on my own words - i just saw the comments post(s) concerning characters...sorry folks.; Reply to this comment


by anglican40 September 20, 2005 11:11 PM EDT: Please CBS, get rid of the 500 character limit. It\'s annoying to type a nice little comment and just because it\'s over 500 characters- whoosh - gone. The Times is greedy as greedy can be. I will give the Eye a chance to generate some interest - but we need some posting! I think CBS has the right idea.; Reply to this comment


by oneofmanyusa September 20, 2005 9:09 PM EDT: No way would I pay because I can\'t afford to. In fact, until recently I was only able to watch news online from CBS. Because of this, I am more faithful to CBS. I am especially pleased with the new Public Eye concept. Thank you, CBS for news that more of us can access. (But remember, there are huge numbers of folks who can\'t afford a computer!); Reply to this comment


by joshtom1-2009 September 20, 2005 8:11 PM EDT: I paid for Times Select the day it was offered. The best newspaper in America must profit so it continues to provide coverage and analysis no other outlet has. Every newspaper in the country hopes Times Select succeeds, so bloggers be damned. You get what you pay for.; Reply to this comment


by dunegirl1 September 20, 2005 4:29 PM EDT: I don\'t think charging money will work. people are too used to getting things on the web for free. my guess is they\'ll go somewhere else for news.; Reply to this comment


by hs_nc September 20, 2005 1:32 PM EDT: if having offered it for free originally--affected their subscriber base the other way. Meaning--people were paying the subscription fee but others were reading the same info online for free. Maybe that is why they changed it?; Reply to this comment


by hs_nc September 20, 2005 1:17 PM EDT: I would not pay to read something online when the nature of the web is..it will get picked up from another news source or someone will reference it on a blog. You can access these pieces without paying the $ for it. I wonder how long this will last and if it will affect their subscriber base--but I also wonder; Reply to this comment