Oh happy day!
As of this very moment—midnight—the NY Times has removed its “TimesSelect” paid subscription requirement for online access to articles by its columnists and, more importantly, to much of the newspaper’s archives—from 1851 and 1922 and from 1987 to the present. But, for some reason—unexplained in either the corporate announcement or the article in today’s paper—“archives for the years 1923-1986 are available to be purchased in single or 10-article packages.” Is this like Medigap?
This change, of course, is advertiser-driven. Online advertisers favor free access, and the Times is betting that the money to be gained by increased advertising on its website will more than offset any loss in TimesSelect subscription revenue.
Richard Pérez-Peña reported in yesterday’s Times:
What changed…was that many more readers started coming to the site from search engines and links on other sites instead of coming directly to NYTimes.com. These indirect readers, unable to get access to articles behind the pay wall and less likely to pay subscription fees than the more loyal direct users, were seen as opportunities for more page views and increased advertising revenue.
In other words, the increased web traffic from open access is expected to increase the attractiveness of the site to advertisers.
I hope this means that other newspapers that are now charging for online access will soon follow suit, so that the links that I provide to you on my blog don’t become locked behind the tollgates after their brief life of unobstructed public access. Predictably, there is already much rejoicing in the blogosphere over the fall of the TimesSelect regime.
This is what I call a free press!