3 ms·
I would love this feature. NYT does real investigative journalism and should be paid for that, but it annoys me to no end when I'm browsing my news feed and cli
by Larrikin 9y ago
I would love this feature. NYT does real investigative journalism and should be paid for that, but it annoys me to no end when I'm browsing my news feed and click a fluff article as a time waster and it's a WaPo or NYT article and I see my counter for the month go up.
- dreamfactored 9y agoYep they could have a lot of fun gaming with it for breaking news, sports results, deep analysis pieces etc. Could even personalise what gets charged to who depending on core obsessions (this proof of insight would be huge with advertisers as well)
- Chaebixi 9y ago> NYT does real investigative journalism and should be paid for that The problem is that's the stuff I wish the most people had easy access to, or order to build momentum to fix the problems. For instance, I post a link to their series on binding arbitration every time that comes up somewhere. That's a good example of something that doesn't sound bad until someone explains it to you.
- Larrikin 9y agoI'm fine with those being a limited number of articles per month. If its something important that needs to be shared with people who don't follow the news regularly, then it shouldn't matter if you can only view 5-10 articles a month. If you're regularly following the news and are consuming all of their most important pieces that will matter historically, then you should be paying for it.