Behold, The New York Times’s pay system. A full-access digital subscription, including iPad and smartphone apps, digital replica edition, etc., costs over $400 per year. The new paywall is a metering plan, which cuts off access to NYT digital content after viewing 20 items per month. If you find an item via Facebook, Twitter, search, etc., it will most likely always be free to view even if you’ve hit this ceiling.  So as far as I can tell, the Times is going two push its readers into two distinct camps: The under 40 crowd that will access content for free through social media, and the 40+ crowd that might actually consider shelling out over $400 per year for full-access to all Times digital content.  Me? I’ll continue to read the news for free through Facebook, Twitter, news aggregators, and the like. If they cut me off down the road, there’s always the AP, Bloomberg, the WSJ (yes, lots of their content is actually free, no strings attached), the LA Times, Reuters, CNN, the Daily Beast, The Atlantic, The Economist online, NPR.org…You get my point. Sure, the Times is better. But $35/month? Ouch. Even with discount I’ll have a hard time meeting that.   I wish the Times best of luck and I hope they can boost their business this way. I just can’t imagine when I’ll start paying for this stuff. 

Behold, The New York Times’s pay system.

A full-access digital subscription, including iPad and smartphone apps, digital replica edition, etc., costs over $400 per year. The new paywall is a metering plan, which cuts off access to NYT digital content after viewing 20 items per month. If you find an item via Facebook, Twitter, search, etc., it will most likely always be free to view even if you’ve hit this ceiling. 

So as far as I can tell, the Times is going two push its readers into two distinct camps: The under 40 crowd that will access content for free through social media, and the 40+ crowd that might actually consider shelling out over $400 per year for full-access to all Times digital content. 

Me? I’ll continue to read the news for free through Facebook, Twitter, news aggregators, and the like. If they cut me off down the road, there’s always the AP, Bloomberg, the WSJ (yes, lots of their content is actually free, no strings attached), the LA Times, Reuters, CNN, the Daily Beast, The Atlantic, The Economist online, NPR.org…You get my point. Sure, the Times is better. But $35/month? Ouch. Even with discount I’ll have a hard time meeting that.  

I wish the Times best of luck and I hope they can boost their business this way. I just can’t imagine when I’ll start paying for this stuff.