The New York Times announced yesterday that it’s planning to launch a “metered access” system for its web site next year, in which readers will be able to see a certain number of articles for free, but after that will have to pay a monthly subscription fee (unless they’re print subscribers, in which case there is no charge). No one yet knows how many free articles a reader will get, or how much they will have to pay per month, but there has been much written about the decision to start charging. If you want to see what I think of the move, you can read my original post, and if you want to see know what readers of the New York Times think, check out the comments on this blog post. And for additional analysis on the decision, check the links below.
— Jeff Jarvis: The journalism professor and author says the NYT is going to charge its most valuable customers, while not charging its least valuable ones, and this doesn’t make sense.
— Rick Edmonds: Poynter Media’s business analyst says the economics of the NYT’s move actually make a lot of sense, and that the paper was right to implement some form of paid access.
— Felix Salmon: Reuters’ media writer isn’t optimistic about the NYT’s chances of making metered access work, and says it is a “sad day for online journalism.”
— C.W. Anderson: Journalism professor wonders how metered access and paywalls will affect the relationship that journalists have with society as a whole.
— Ken Doctor: The news industry analyst answers nine questions that have been raised about the NYT paywall.
— Steve Yelvington: Veteran newspaperman has a list of things we won’t learn from the NYT paywall.
Photo courtesy of Flickr user itspaulkelly.