Question for you. Is the NYT worth $3.75 a week?

[Stuart G]

The Newspsper Industry is changing rapidly. There are some excellent people writing for the NYT.
To keep that institution, the NYT, vibrant and strong, is it worth it to you, in your opinion, to subscribe for 15.00 a month?

I've been thinking about it, and would like to hear from others.
I have read that this paper has had some financial difficulties in the past.
Is this the best way to support it?

[JVS]

1. No.

[doc03]

2. I think their Sunday paper goes for $5.00 at Starbucks in these

parts.

[hlthe2b]

3. Do you mean delivered daily hard copy to your home?

Incredible bargain--even more so for those outside the NYC area.

That said, I unfortunately don't want a hard copy newspaper delivered daily to my door. I don't have time to fully read it except on the weekends and thus rely on the internet to peruse a variety of newspapers. I feel guilty about this because it is having such devastating impacts on the newspaper industry, but having had to deal with the ever rising mounds of unread newspapers in my home, it just isn't worth it.

I don't even buy my own Denver Post except occasionally on weekends. I read online about a dozen US and international papers--not fully, but peruse the major stories. I read the NYT less, because of their subscription fees which I just can't justify.

So, there you have it... I don't know how to save the industry. It would be nice if there were an online subscription "menu" that, say, for your $15/month would allow access to a certain number of the major US and international newspapers that you chose each day and could change each day as you desired. I would be more likely to go with that. But it would require the newspapers to come together to arrange such a service.

[Demeter]

4. Only if you actually read it

[MineralMan]

5. It is if you like the paper and read it.

If you don't like it and don't read it, then it's way overpriced.

I can't answer your question for you. I read the NYT daily. I like it. It is worth it for me.

[Cigar11]

6. Only if you’re in the Deep Woods

and have nothing else to use.

[KansDem]

7. Depends on how much you value your canary.

I'd rather be sitting and shitting on the New York Times!

[Happyhippychick]

8. Absolutely. My favorite paper!

[TreasonousBastard]

9. I pay $18 a week to pick it up at 7-11 every day, so...

yeah, that would be a bargain. And I don't buy it to keep them alive-- I buy it because it has unique resources you just can't get in one place anywhere else.

Been thinking about getting the digital edition for a lot less, but I'm used to reading actual newsprint and it's a break from staring at a computer screen or tablet.

On edit...

They're not in any danger of going belly up any time soon, but because print ad revenue is down everywhere they're not making money like they used to.

[msedano]

10. i subscribe but

read on-line. the value in daily newspapers exceeds the price. now if only someone would outlaw those irritating wrap-arounds on the first page...

[saras]

11. No. It doesn't even do $3.75 worth of window cleaning.

It's a corporate propaganda outfit, and has been one, and well documented at it, for many decades.

They'll print enough reliable stuff to get you to swallow the crap until it's too late for the truth to matter - a really well-established technique with them. Just check out their "corrections" of major political stories.

For a not unreasonable example, compare their coverage of Al Gore during the Bush-Gore election to more objective sources.

[Brickbat]

12. I used to subscribe to it, and then went to Sundays, but even the Sundays I can't stand anymore.

I know it's the "New York" Times, but it's certainly lost its way as the newspaper of record and its national perspective sucks ass. And I'm tired of reading stories about people worrying about elite preschools, socialites I've never heard of, and so on.

[closeupready]

13. Personally? I wouldn't pay that, no.

I would pay for the Guardian or the Financial Times; maybe even al-Jazeera.