This morning I received a “breaking news email” from the New York Times that the New York Times had decided to start charging for access in 2011. I really don’t understand why they would send a breaking news email over this news. First, everyone else had been reporting the Times decision for a couple of days and second it’s not newsworthy enough to disturb me with an email or text.
Outside of the fact that it’s not breaking news, the NY Times has decided to try out the middle ground in the payment wall debate, again. Last time with Times Select they hid their “premium” content from those who didn’t want to pay. This time they are going to ask the power users who access their web site more frequently to pay. Unfortunately, they aren’t ready to release simple details about the plan so we really can’t make a judgement call on it.
It would be nice to know how much is frequent? How many article can I access before I have to pay? How much will I have to pay? Then maybe we can make some comparisons to how much they are making on advertising revenue versus how much they will make for charging for access.
You think if they were sending a news alert about charging in 2011, they could have at least gotten the full story from their bosses.

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by The Tolbert Report, Lannie Byrd. Lannie Byrd said: Blog: : Breaking News: NY Times to charge for access??? http://www.lanniebyrd.com/2010/01/20/breaking-news-ny-times-to-charge-for-access/ [...]
[...] with Morris Newspapers has done the math on a soft paywall as proposed by the New York Times (we discussed this last week). Steves figures that a newspaper should be prepared to give 35 to 55 percent of their [...]