17 September 2006

Times "Select"

I just picked up the Sunday papers, the Times (of London) and the Observer this week, which caused me to reflect on the other (New York) Times, and how it compares to my favourite English broadsheets.

And I decided that while it comes off as bit more drab - probably because it doesn't use as much colour and is more sparing with the gossipy feature articles - it's probably a more solid newspaper in strictly journalistic terms, i.e., placing more emphasis on accuracy and in-depth investigative reporting. So although I don't buy it very often, even when I'm in New York, I unfailingly peruse its website.

Which is where I run into this conundrum: why does the Times give away all that excellent writing for free, and then try to sell (via subscription to its "Times Select" feature) the right to read columnists like Dowd and Krugman (there's a name for a Dickensian law firm), both of whom would be more at home in the pages of the student newspaper at some mid-level state university?


JAb Seattle said...

Dowd maybe but your thoughts on Krugman horribly miss the mark.

Patrick said...

Because charging for the actual news segments would hinder their goal of destroying America.