NY Times Goes for Broke

[Uncle Ted]

Is the NYT any better than CNN Huffington Post? I really don't know because to me they all seem the same. Why pay for something I can get for free elsewhere?

Fixed it for you. To answer your question: No. I do like regularly reading Krugman's humor column, however.

How about we take up a collection to buy a shared web subscription for CUF "family and friends"?

[il Padrino Ute]

Nobody buys the print edition of the NY Times. Why would anyone pay for the online edition?

[doctorcoug]

Times has kind of a monopoly there is nothing else quite like it.

Really? It has been years since my Econ days...can you remind me of the definition of monopolistic competition? Did it change recently?

[SeattleUte]

Really? It has been years since my Econ days...can you remind me of the definition of monopolistic competition? Did it change recently?

Any type of product differentiation can be loosely referred to that way. It's more descriptive than technical. You don't know much about economics and markets do you.

[Uncle Ted]

Very short sighted.

For one thing, any lover of liberty should want to help make sure the Times doesn't fail. The Times is about the only remainging U.S. news organ with overseas bureaus, that writes the majority of its own storeis, etc. It doesn invaluable work promoting obscure or new writers.

Judith Miller...

Since her early days at the Times, when she inserted CIA misinformation into a piece on Libya, she's always been a tool of power. She was the voice of the Defense Department, embedded at the Times. She was hyping bullshit stories about Iraq's WMD capabilities as far back as 1998, and in the run-up to the war, her front-page scoops were cited by the Bush administration as evidence that Saddam needed to be taken out, right away.

Stuff like this makes me wonder just how many tools like this work at the Times.

[wuapinmon]

Judith Miller...



Stuff like this makes me wonder just how many tools like this work at the Times.

As opposed to Fox?

[DU Ute]

This doesn't bother Sarah Palin in the slightest.

[oxcoug]

I guess I shouldn't be surprised but I'm always amused at how many people still think of the Times as some kind of standard for journalistic excellence.

The Times' slide into mediocrity mirrors the decline of its stock value by 77% in the past 7 years.

Its steady failure to separate "Church" (editorial) and "State" (news) has cost it credibility and circulation. The balance of its columnists reflects the politicization of news in the Sulberger Jr. era pretty nicely. Paul Krugman - frothing, snarling left wing ideologue. Maureen Dowd - solidly unabashedly left. The (recently departed) Frank Rich - frothing (though not necessarily snarling) left wing ideologue. Tom Friedman - moderately but solidly left. Bob Herbert - solidly left. Nick Kristof - solidly left, in spite of occasional neocon foreign policy sympathies. Gail Collins - center left. Bob Herbert - solidly left. David Brooks - dead center with the slightest lean to the right. Ross Douthat - moderate right (the token actual somewhat conservative guy).

William McGowan's "Gray Lady Down" tells the story of the Times' pretty well - though admittedly it's a bit of a hit from the right. Still, it's filled with indisputably factual demonstrations of amateurs run amok at the Times. As described by the Columbia Journalism Review:

"Gray Lady Down is a free-swinging bill of indictment against today's Times....McGowan's assault is worth reading for the details it contains on many genuine journalistic misdemeanors and crimes, embarrassing gaffes by callow Times staffers, and failures to pursue inconvenient stories."

[Uncle Ted]

As opposed to Fox?

Yes, FOX is most likely just another tool. Beck is most likely on the CIA/DoD's payroll as well. Of course, that assumes he is smart enough to charge for the propaganda he promotes for them.

The Economist is a much better news source, IMO, and actually worth the subscription price. You may want to consider offshoring your news as well. I will miss Krugman's column when the Times goes away, however. Again, only for the entertainment value.

[doctorcoug]

Any type of product differentiation can be loosely referred to that way. It's more descriptive than technical. You don't know much about economics and markets do you.

I know this really awesome pizza joint in Connecticut. It is an old firehouse and they use a fire brick oven to cook the pizza. Also, instead of pepperoni, you get toppings such as filet mignon. I am unaware of anybody else like this. So, I guess they participate in monopolistic competition for old firehouse, firebrick-cooked filet mignon pizza in Connecticut.

Glad we are clear on that.

[RobinFinderson]

The Achilles' heel of the NYT plan seems to be that linked articles will not count against a user's monthly free allotment. That seems like a huge boondoggle to aggregators like HuffPo. For that matter we should link to any articles we find interesting here on CUF so that fellow readers can find the best articles and read them for free.

[RobinFinderson]

I know this really awesome pizza joint in Connecticut. It is an old firehouse and they use a fire brick oven to cook the pizza. Also, instead of pepperoni, you get toppings such as filet mignon. I am unaware of anybody else like this. So, I guess they participate in monopolistic competition for old firehouse, firebrick-cooked filet mignon pizza in Connecticut.

Glad we are clear on that.

Bar Pizza in New Haven? Be sure to attend when on gay night when they have GoGo boys dancing in the back room.

[RobinFinderson]

I guess I shouldn't be surprised but I'm always amused at how many people still think of the Times as some kind of standard for journalistic excellence.

The Times' slide into mediocrity mirrors the decline of its stock value by 77% in the past 7 years.

Its steady failure to separate "Church" (editorial) and "State" (news) has cost it credibility and circulation. The balance of its columnists reflects the politicization of news in the Sulberger Jr. era pretty nicely. Paul Krugman - frothing, snarling left wing ideologue. Maureen Dowd - solidly unabashedly left. The (recently departed) Frank Rich - frothing (though not necessarily snarling) left wing ideologue. Tom Friedman - moderately but solidly left. Bob Herbert - solidly left. Nick Kristof - solidly left, in spite of occasional neocon foreign policy sympathies. Gail Collins - center left. Bob Herbert - solidly left. David Brooks - dead center with the slightest lean to the right. Ross Douthat - moderate right (the token actual somewhat conservative guy).

William McGowan's "Gray Lady Down" tells the story of the Times' pretty well - though admittedly it's a bit of a hit from the right. Still, it's filled with indisputably factual demonstrations of amateurs run amok at the Times. As described by the Columbia Journalism Review:

"Gray Lady Down is a free-swinging bill of indictment against today's Times....McGowan's assault is worth reading for the details it contains on many genuine journalistic misdemeanors and crimes, embarrassing gaffes by callow Times staffers, and failures to pursue inconvenient stories."

So Ox, the NYT has slid into mediocrity, which is to say that it was once excellent, no? Where do various American Newspapers, including past versions of current papers, fall on the oxcoug scale of journalistic excellence?

Your own brief indictment of the NYT focuses on its liberal Op-Ed staff, and doesn't address at all the quality of the writing or ideas. You seem to be saying that the paper is mediocre because it is too liberally biassed in its Op-ed staff, which is weird because the Op-ed section is just a tiny piece of the paper.

For a broader indictment of professional practice you refer to an admitted 'hit piece from the right.' I am all for examining points of fact, no matter where they come from, but I'm curious about the oxcoug standards for when a partisan presentation of points of fact deserve 'eye rolls' over cocktails (Krugman) and when they deserve deeper consideration (McGowan).

To me, it seems like daily newspapers are going to be generating articles of various degrees of quality. If we were to make a list of the best and most informative news articles, and another list of the most thoughtfully argued op-eds, I'd still bet that a plurality of American published pieces would come from the NYT.

[Pelado]

Anyone here care about Jill Abramson's firing?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/15/bu...-at-times.html

[Northwestcoug]

Anyone here care about Jill Abramson's firing?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/15/bu...-at-times.html

Eh. She was probably getting paid too much