Is The New York Times The Paper Of An Obsolete Record?

from the can't-keep-up-with-the-times dept

We've discussed many times how newspapers simply don't get the internet, and Adam Penenberg is suggesting that there may be no greater example than the NY Times. The Times, of course, was one of the first online newspapers to require online registration and set up a paid archive for articles after a short period of free time online. However, because of that, the New York Times results barely appear at all in Google. If they're striving to be "the paper of record" then they need to be where people are looking -- and these days, people are looking in Google. Penenberg notes that despite the fact that the Times makes very little money off of those archives, they won't open them, because it might endanger their $20 million per year deal with Lexis-Nexis. Talk about getting hung up by legacy systems. Either way, it's a good point that the folks at the NY Times (and other newspapers) need to realize. Being online means being accessible. If you're not, then today's surfers aren't going to care. You may believe you can hang onto a small group and sell their demographic data to advertisers, but the data is dirty and the times are changing. People don't want to jump through hoops when there's a lot of other content out there, and if the command line of the internet is a search engine, these sites that block themselves off are simply making themselves obsolete.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    dorpus, 14 Jul 2004 @ 4:04am

    Price of Clean Data

    It still seems fair to charge a price for reliable data that rises above the noise?

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Average Joe, 14 Jul 2004 @ 4:39am

      Re: Price of Clean Data

      I don't believe in paying for ANY services online. I run a couple of websites that are absolutely free. I provide a service out of the goodness of my heart. My dayjob pays my bills, not my webjob. If you NEED online cash to run your website, get off the net. The net is about sharing information, not about opening up a gazillion "stores". jeesh!

      link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Chomper, 14 Jul 2004 @ 8:18am

        Re: Price of Clean Data

        uhhh, I think the net is another medium to make a viable business out of. People work hard to get that information together. Why shouldn't they get paid?

        I'm not for the NYTimes, I think they are a bunch of blowhards, but this nonsense about not getting paid and everything should be free is crap. If you want to charge for what you hard to put on the web, then you should. If you want it free, then so be it. But it shouldn't be by default that something is free.

        link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Mike (profile), 14 Jul 2004 @ 8:30am

          Re: Price of Clean Data

          Sure, they can charge. That's not the point. The point is that, with the way the internet works, if you're going to want to matter going forward, you need to be found. The next generation isn't going to care about the name "The New York Times." They're just going to care about what they can find in a search engine... and if you can't find The New York Times in a search engine, then people won't go there.

          link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            dorpus, 14 Jul 2004 @ 11:25am

            Re: Price of Clean Data

            Doesn't techdirt depend on selling clean data for its business model?

            link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Santorum is a pedophile, 14 Jul 2004 @ 12:00pm

              News sites ARE biased


              Several of my coworkers & I have been informally discussing the slanted styles of different news website for several months.

              FoxNews is Republican.
              CNN, MSNBC are Democrats.

              Mike is right, the next generation won't know or care about The New York Times.

              I know I've pretty much forgotten about it.

              link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      thecaptain, 14 Jul 2004 @ 6:11am

      Re: Price of Clean Data

      How does that apply to the New York Times these days?

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    aNonMooseCowherd, 14 Jul 2004 @ 5:49am

    is the NYT still important?

    The more important question is whether the New York Times is even good enough any more to be worth caring about. The editors' recent display of disregard for the truth throws its reputation into considerable doubt.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2004 @ 6:39am

      Re: is the NYT still important?

      Not really, I quit reading it a few years ago.

      There was too much opinion passing as news on the front page.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Ryan, 14 Jul 2004 @ 7:31am

    Nexis-Lexis

    Nexus-Lexis is a huge deal used by pretty much everybody who matters, an 20 million dollars is a pile of money. Being on GoogleNews is worth how much?

    Maybe someday soon, but right now Google news is not a real source for 'legitimate' journalists, Nexus-Lexis is.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Ron, 14 Jul 2004 @ 12:13pm

    No Subject Given

    It is not just Google, many of the 'weird news' compliations that I check have sent me there before.....and I always immediately close the window. There are way too many other web sites to go to that don't require sign up.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jozef, 14 Jul 2004 @ 5:15pm

    Brave New eWorld

    In a perfect world we'd get more reviews like this one: judicious, eloquent, and animated by compelling prophetic ideas.

    Sadly, last week my favourite newspaper the Sydney Morning Herald http://www.smh.com.au took the leaf out of NY Times amazon.book of how to fail in a new brave eWorld...

    link to this | view in chronology ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.