Comments on: TIMES SELECT: WHY IT MAKES SENSE http://www.populationstatistic.com/archives/2005/09/25/times-select-why-it-makes-sense/ Read. React. Repeat. Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:57:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Population Statistic http://www.populationstatistic.com/archives/2005/09/25/times-select-why-it-makes-sense/#comment-21647 Population Statistic Fri, 11 Nov 2005 04:40:40 +0000 http://www.populationstatistic.com/archives/2005/09/25/times-select-why-it-makes-sense/#comment-21647 <strong>TIMES SELECTED</strong> When the New York Times rolled out its TimesSelect subscription service back in September, there was a lot of general bitching from the blogging peanut gallery, while I noted it was probably a successful move. The numbers are now in, and my hunch pro... TIMES SELECTED

When the New York Times rolled out its TimesSelect subscription service back in September, there was a lot of general bitching from the blogging peanut gallery, while I noted it was probably a successful move.
The numbers are now in, and my hunch pro…

]]> By: trumwill http://www.populationstatistic.com/archives/2005/09/25/times-select-why-it-makes-sense/#comment-13910 trumwill Mon, 26 Sep 2005 15:14:55 +0000 http://www.populationstatistic.com/archives/2005/09/25/times-select-why-it-makes-sense/#comment-13910 I think the part-free model is by far the best, but NYT did it completely backwards. Opinions are like blowholes, everyone's got one. There really isn't even much mystery as to what Krugman, Dowd, Brooks, and so on are going to write about anymore. The Times's first-rate news-reporting, on the other hand, is much more valuable. Loads of interesting articles day on and day out that I won't get some variation of somewhere else. Only the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal can really claim that. They went the opposite way that the Wall Street Journal did. When I can afford it, I'll subscribe to the WSJ but no way the NYT as long as the articles are free. I think the part-free model is by far the best, but NYT did it completely backwards. Opinions are like blowholes, everyone’s got one. There really isn’t even much mystery as to what Krugman, Dowd, Brooks, and so on are going to write about anymore.

The Times’s first-rate news-reporting, on the other hand, is much more valuable. Loads of interesting articles day on and day out that I won’t get some variation of somewhere else. Only the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal can really claim that. They went the opposite way that the Wall Street Journal did. When I can afford it, I’ll subscribe to the WSJ but no way the NYT as long as the articles are free.

]]> By: Soccer Dad http://www.populationstatistic.com/archives/2005/09/25/times-select-why-it-makes-sense/#comment-13908 Soccer Dad Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:48:33 +0000 http://www.populationstatistic.com/archives/2005/09/25/times-select-why-it-makes-sense/#comment-13908 <strong>Selecting the times</strong> Given the amount of interest my post about getting around Times Select has generated, I see that Times Select is of some interest. Doing a Google or Technorati search of the topic also shows that the Times's decision is rather... Selecting the times

Given the amount of interest my post about getting around Times Select has generated, I see that Times Select is of some interest. Doing a Google or Technorati search of the topic also shows that the Times’s decision is rather…

]]>