Finally. New York Times has put an end to blocking web readers from getting some of the best columnists out there. Beginning Wednesday there is no more pay to read and I can link here whenever something seems so good that I would hope others would see it.
The columnists of New York Times did not like having their voices stifled, and it was especially depressing to see it happen when more than ever we needed divergent opinions. So for those of us who have enjoyed the likes of Dowd and Krugman, we finally can link freely to them. Once again, they will show up on other online papers that did carry them but lost the ability to share those opinions with their online readers.
I do understand the need for papers to make money. New York Times won't be there at all if it doesn't find a way to stay profitable. I just wanted those editorial voices to be freely read and debated. Unfortunately the Internet has a hard time figuring out how to do that without shutting off readers.
Anyway to celebrate, here is today's column by Gail Collins on McCain and it's well worth reading. :)
8 comments:
I read that the Times found their online advertising was increasing much beyond their expectations. They were being linked to by a lot of Google and Yahoo searches. So, not only did they deselect their Select, but they're making much of their priceless archives available too. This is absolutely great news.
If they were so worried about making money then why did they charge Moveon.org so much less than their standard non-profit organization rate for the Anti-Patraeus ad.
Interesting Article. I have heard McCain be critical of the war effort many times over the last 3 years. He has been saying that we need more troops on the ground to gain control of the situation. But what is he supposed to do? Do what Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid do and pretend they are the commander in chief and stomp around like spoiled children demanding that the president do what they say. McCain knows his place and has done his part to serve the best he can and not just play politics like all the other people taking shots at everyone in the administration. At least he had an idea of what he would do different. Most everyone else just talks about W being stupid and his policies failing but have no clue what they would actually do differently if they were given command.
I didn't imply the NY Times was having economic problems, ingineer. I was just saying they all have to make money or they don't stay in business. As for advertising rates, they vary and those who regularly pay for advertising might get a better break. That happens in all business. I don't know the circumstances on this one.
And as for McCain, he didn't just say it was wrong, he did nothing about it. Read the piece by Collins and deal with those facts, not just generalities. McCain contributed to Bush having more years in office and that after what bush did to him in 2000. Amazing what some will sell out for power.
Lots of people are saying what Bush should do now. You just aren't listening to them as they don't suit you or the Rush mouth's agenda.
btw congress actually does have war responsibilities. You act as though we have a dictator in the presidential office as I am assuming Bush does also. It's amazing what he did like with the news conference where a fox plant gives him a question for him to answer that he knew was coming and wanted about Petraeus and that ad. He then says it was against all military and I suppose you all on the right go amen. While the Republicans (and some democrats out of gutlessness) refuse to give our fighting men any relief at all to avoid a draft or to face the reality we aren't paying for the war-- not through how we treat the military nor the costs economically.
Well 72 Senators voted to condemn the Moveon ad so there must be something wrong with it because some dems had to cross party lines to get that kind of vote. And the Times has a rate book of what they charge to what kind of organization and Moveon paid something like one third of the normal charge that a non-profit group would have to pay.
I know Congress has war duties, but the current leaders in the Senate and House seem to want to do the executive and legislative branches duties.
And I don't listen to Rush very often.
The Times said they don't reveal how much they charge and do have varying rates for bulk orders. It is what they said and I don't know. Obviously the right wing got all upset that a man who Bush sent out to do a political job (Petraeus) got treated as though he was a politician. What a shock that you can't make yourself immune at the same time you set yourself up to sell policy. As for Congress-- they are a bunch of wimps and we all know it whether they are the left or the right. They got suckered by Bush during the time he was given power to maneuver with Saddam only he didn't want that, he wanted power to declare WWIII, which he didn't really get but he's acting as though he did... You liked how the leaders kowtowed to Bush, how they followed everything he wanted, when they were Republicans. We Democrats want more from our leaders and are disgusted they are not being more forceful. In the case of Bush, they have one power now and that's to refuse him the money to continue this misbegotten war but they won't. They will whimper and give him enough to last the rest of his term. I am disgusted with them all. Some patriots
Hey something we can agree on. We are both disgusted with them ALL.
Post a Comment