"We are not trying to maximize clicks and sell low-margin advertising against them. We are not trying to win a pageviews arms race. We believe that the more sou

"We are not trying to maximize clicks and sell low-margin advertising against them. We are not trying to win a pageviews arms race. We believe that the more sound business strategy for The Times is to provide journalism so strong that several million people around the world are willing to pay for it" I'm having trouble separating a pageview arms race from crafting the kind of content that appeals to the kind of people who would pay for a subscription. I get that the New York Times isn't writing clickbait articles, but they are producing articles of the same substance on a daily basis. You get columns from Paul Krugman, Michelle Goldman, Gail Collins, etc. and it's always about misgivings with Donald Trump and the Republican Party. I rarely find anything substantial about non-political topics from these folks. I suspect that's because what they write is quite popular with the "Three-L" people who pay for this kind of content (Leafy, Liberal, Loaded). This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I find it really pigeonholes the kind of content you see from The Times.