The New York Times has finally acted on plans to charge for its web content. Starting March 28, heavy readers will have to pay $15 a month to access NYTimes.com and the paper's mobile app, $20 for the site and its iPad app, or $35 for all three platforms.
Ridiculous. Who would pay for liberal, agenda oriented media in the first place when you can get actual news on talk radio for free. I'll stick with Limbaugh, Beck, and Hannity for actual reporting........something the NYT has no idea how to do these days.
And so, the countdown clock to the demise of the New York Times begins ticking in earnest...
They are asking way too much, with no "must have" hook. If we can get the same news and information for free anywhere else on the web, why would we pay that much for the NYT? Just because they have a slick app? Just to read their reporters' views on stories? Just as a status thing to say you read the NYT? No compelling reason to burn your money with them, that I can see.
If customers do not like it, they need to let NYT know now!
It feels like digital news subscriptions should be cheaper. What are we getting as customers? Subscription pricing models and account management need to be more flexible too. For example... stopping, starting, or halting a subscription, prorating invoces when stopped with in a posting period should be in place depending on the representation and frequency of what the definable digital product of ?News Edition? is.
The gateway to getting the news in any format should not be an opportunity to nickel and dime customers. Pay once access anywhere where reasonable should be the game. Thus, customers should not have to pay for apps to get it on your iPad, iPhone, Android, PC etc... it should be 1 price or almost so cheap you will not think anything of it. More over they need to develop better tools to shift through all the information to take advantage of the digital medium. Moreover, customers on a subscription should have access to the full back catalogue... ala Netflix style ... a NewsFix of sorts.
They save on printing and distribution. Some of the savings need to be used to improve the quality of the product where editing and proofreading the information is lower in the digital space as compared to the printed media. I'm not going to say the NYT has done it, but I have notice an over all lack of quality over the years in digital content vs. printed media because digital release cycles are so fast. It?s the same across all fields that digitally distribute content Print and interactive, with the exception of Movies.