

NY Times To Stop Charging For Online Content - neilc
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/business/media/18times.html?ex=1347768000&en=88011ab45717e39d&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

======
brlewis
Quote:

What changed, The Times said, was that many more readers started coming to the
site from search engines and links on other sites instead of coming directly
to NYTimes.com. These indirect readers, unable to get access to articles
behind the pay wall and less likely to pay subscription fees than the more
loyal direct users, were seen as opportunities for more page views and
increased advertising revenue.

End Quote

Good for them for paying attention. The growth they'll see next is more
visitors coming in through blog posts. Bloggers will be more inclined to cite
NYT articles now that the pay wall is gone. They'll still charge for articles
20-75 years old, but most citations will be for articles within the last 20
years.

~~~
pg
Finally they get that their frontpage has been replaced by reddit and digg and
Google News. People don't want to buy the album, just singles.

------
danielha
Ah, good for them. They've caught up with the times (terrible pun intended).

~~~
dpapathanasiou
Sign of the Times? ;)

(sorry, couldn't resist)

~~~
adamdoupe
The Times they are a-changin'

------
bharath
Awesome. Now I can get back to reading Tom Friedman.

