No, it’s not run by the Times.
I LOVE the NYT, but that’s too much cash to pay. I’ll miss it.
Interesting. I didn’t get an email with the offer, but after reading the above link, I turned off AdBlock for the NYTimes and got the interstitial offer on the next click. It wanted me to click a link, so I did, which brought me to a page where I had to re-log in. After re-logging in, I got an error saying I was already subscribed to this offer.
Anyone know where I can go to check? I can’t tell if I really got it or not.
Athena I’d email customer service (don’t call…I’ve read horror stories on not even being able to get online access when people have the physical paper, which is how it’s supposed to be) but I’m guessing that it’s not legit. My email did not contain a code but when I clicked on the link within the email it said that my code was accepted. I think they simply took a handful of the top users; I don’t think I was special, just lucky.
The Times doesn’t have a leg to stand on with the Twitter thing. If it gets shut down, a million will pop up in its place. There’s also precedent with a bunch of other fake twitter accounts - like FakeAPStyle and so forth. They even had a panel at SXSW, that’s how legit and accepted they are.
If you didn’t get the email and don’t wish to pay for access, I suggest you start browsing for any and all Twitter links for it. I totally called it. It kind of hurts that the Times hasn’t realized in the 15 years the Internet has been in middle class households that having someone under 35 with an above average IQ and tech skills in on the decision making process would have been beneficial.
I did try calling them yesterday. Sheesh, what a horror that was. First, I completely confused the rep because I had neither an account number, a phone number, or a delivery address for him to look up my account with. Apparently I was the only online-only customer he’d ever, ever dealt with. Once I got him to look up my account via email address, I explained my problem. Rep responded by telling me the subscription options. I was like 
, and explained once again that I was calling because I had clicked on an ad that promised to give me a free subscription. He then told me digital subscriptions won’t start until 3/28. Uh, yeah. And it’s 34 degrees out here, but neither of those facts, though true, have any relevance to the issue I’m trying to work out.
It went on and on like that, until I just hung up.
I did email customer service this morning. We’ll see if that gets me any better results.
The whole episode sounds more frustrating than dealing with foreign tech support. It also underscores how completely unprepared the whole organization is for any of this. WSJ’s paywall is much lower. I can’t see how this is going to be a success. Let us know how the email thing works out Athena.
So, it’s a stupidity tax, then?
Have you read this thread at all? You don’t have to tweet yourself to subscribe or look at a Twitter feed. Many people ignore Kim Kardashian and subscribe to coupon or Amazon twitter feeds for coupons and discounts. There’s plenty of good entertainment on Twitter as well, like FakeAPStyle and the fake BP Public Relations account. To think Twitter is a vacuous hole is like saying the Internet is only for poorn. It’s a remarkably insular and naive viewpoint. As we’ve already established, people are creative and there’s at least one Twitter feed of all the relevant NYTimes pieces. Subscribe or bookmark the link and voila, you have free access.
I just got the offer Athena had - an in-screen offer through my RSS reader from Lincoln. I was hoping to subscribe my SO so I clicked on it and it told me I was “already subscribed”. Ah well. I hope that doesn’t keep popping up because it’s annoying.
Meanwhile, I’m sitting here on Firefox with Adblock turned off, and madly clicking on articles on the New York Times website, hoping to see that ad. No luck so far.
Someone who knows more about Internet ad sales than I do will chime in, but we were chuckling around here about the Lincoln announcement as being in one form or another a (very rapid) climb-down of sorts by the Times, their advertisers, or both. I can imagine some tense conversations between Internet banner ad salesmen/brokers and their potential advertisers – “No, it’s not that we’re going to penalize our most avid readers who generate the most unique page views and allow your ad to be served to them disproportionately far more than the freeloaders, it’s . . . uh . . . hey, why don’t we try this?”
Dewey, are you logged into the NYT site itself? If not, create an account for yourself now. I think that’s how they tagged me within my RSS feeder. My browser has me logged in but not my RSS Reader, but yesterday at some point I think I logged in through my RSS reader. I don’t think they offer it to people who don’t have accounts with them. I created my account a few months ago when I clicked on a Times link through my RSS reader and it asked me to log in, so I created an account.
Yes, I’m logged in. I’m using the same login I’ve had on their site for years.
I give up - what’s FTN?
Fuck This Noise.
Kids these days.
It’s clearly too expensive. But, it is also confusing. One price for PCs, one price for mobile and another price for tablets. Why? It’s all the same content. It doesn’t make any sense. If they kept it simple and cheaper they would have a better chance of attracting people. Say, charge a couple of bucks a week to access the content on any platform. Then, create apps on Android and iOS that feeds the content in interesting ways as an alternative to the browser. Charge for the app, and that is another revenue stream. Or offer a free ad driven app. Unlike on the PC, most mobile applications can’t have ads blocked, so you have a guarantee that those ads are flowing through. The important thing is make the application worth using. If you want to be read, the presentation has to draw people in. Newspapers in print format had to do the same thing. Color ink, tabloid format, good headlines, on and on. Things were done to bring people in and make them want to read your product. They have to do the same thing in the digital age. The webpage has to be clean and offer access to information in an easy way. The mobile apps have to be well written and offer an interesting experience.
I know Murdoch is trying something like this with the Daily on the iPad. From what I understand it’s not great. But, I hope it innovates and improves, so that others can follow in the footsteps and offer something people will want to buy.
The social network feeds that offer all of the New York Times content will be shut down as soon as they gain popularity. So, it will be a constant cat and mouse game of one feed opening, getting shut down and another feed opening. I don’t know if the Times is going to up the security to make it harder to do this after the paywall goes up or not. If the prices were more fair I don’t think they would have to worry about it.
I get why they want to keep social network links open - it’s a good way to get new subscribers. But, why leave that loophole? If you are going to have a search engine limit, why not create one for the social networks? It doesn’t make much sense to me.
Anyway. I don’t really care. I get all my news from reading Shoe. As long as that stays free I will be well informed.