"The New York Times Company is considering charging a fee for access to its website, and has begun asking its print edition subscribers how such a charge would affect their subscriptions.
CASE CLOSED on the LYING, DIVISIVE, OBFUSCATING, OMITTING, AGENDA-PUSHING, WAR-PROMOTING, Zionist-controlled shit sheets known as AmeriKa's "news"papers!
In a survey targeting existing subscribers, the media company said it was "considering charging a monthly fee of five dollars to access its content, including all its articles, blogs and multimedia."
That's WAY TOO MUCH for SHIT!
The survey then asks: "How likely would you be to pay a 2.50 dollar monthly fee -- which would be a 50 percent discount for home delivery subscribers -- for continued, unlimited access to nytimes.com?"
NOT LIKELY AT ALL!
At present, users can access all content on the nytimes.com website for free, but the company has experimented with access charges before. In 2005, it launched Times Select, which charged a fee for access to some opinion and editorial content, but it shut the program down two years later...."
You KNOW WHY, don't you?
NO ONE PAID for NYT CRAP!
Let me tell you a little story about a guy I knew, readers:
The guy I'm talking about used to look forward to getting his morning papers. He used to purchase the New York Times and Boston Globe every day and meticulously outlined the stories he would cover, marking them with red and blue ink. While understanding the biases of the MSM, he still believed they did report events as they happened. There was no reason to doubt the truth of America's newspapers. Yes, there may have been some mistakes and omissions, but for the most part they did a decent job.
After about a year of increasingly poor MSM coverage and exposure to the blogs, his commentaries became more and more strident. He couldn't believe the scale of lies he was seeing, not just on Iraq and 9/11, but on every single issue (the weather fer cryin' out loud). Such behavior led him to stop purchasing the New York Times. That was part of his New Year's resolution for 2008 and it stuck. The strange part is that he found himself visiting the New York Times website less and less.
He kept purchasing a Boston Globe in the belief that it added a certain perspective and kitsch to his blog, an on-the-ground report on the MSM from his home base; however, their agenda-pushing propaganda -- oddly(?), the New York Times owns the Boston Globe -- just got worse and worse and worse and continues to this day. I guess that's why newspapers are failing: when they can't even please their most faithful purchasers, what hope do they have? They shouldn't tell all those lies.
Anyhow, he decided to scrap purchases of the Boston Globe as his New Years' resolution for 2009. Unfortunately, that resolution did not sick (but it may soon).
It wouldn't effect me at all (see below)!
Any COINCIDENCE that the GLOBE MISSED THIS?
CASE CLOSED on the LYING, DIVISIVE, OBFUSCATING, OMITTING, AGENDA-PUSHING, WAR-PROMOTING, Zionist-controlled shit sheets known as AmeriKa's "news"papers!
In a survey targeting existing subscribers, the media company said it was "considering charging a monthly fee of five dollars to access its content, including all its articles, blogs and multimedia."
That's WAY TOO MUCH for SHIT!
The survey then asks: "How likely would you be to pay a 2.50 dollar monthly fee -- which would be a 50 percent discount for home delivery subscribers -- for continued, unlimited access to nytimes.com?"
NOT LIKELY AT ALL!
At present, users can access all content on the nytimes.com website for free, but the company has experimented with access charges before. In 2005, it launched Times Select, which charged a fee for access to some opinion and editorial content, but it shut the program down two years later...."
You KNOW WHY, don't you?
NO ONE PAID for NYT CRAP!
Let me tell you a little story about a guy I knew, readers:
The guy I'm talking about used to look forward to getting his morning papers. He used to purchase the New York Times and Boston Globe every day and meticulously outlined the stories he would cover, marking them with red and blue ink. While understanding the biases of the MSM, he still believed they did report events as they happened. There was no reason to doubt the truth of America's newspapers. Yes, there may have been some mistakes and omissions, but for the most part they did a decent job.
(For more on his journey see A Lifetime of Lies Since 9/11)
After about a year of increasingly poor MSM coverage and exposure to the blogs, his commentaries became more and more strident. He couldn't believe the scale of lies he was seeing, not just on Iraq and 9/11, but on every single issue (the weather fer cryin' out loud). Such behavior led him to stop purchasing the New York Times. That was part of his New Year's resolution for 2008 and it stuck. The strange part is that he found himself visiting the New York Times website less and less.
He kept purchasing a Boston Globe in the belief that it added a certain perspective and kitsch to his blog, an on-the-ground report on the MSM from his home base; however, their agenda-pushing propaganda -- oddly(?), the New York Times owns the Boston Globe -- just got worse and worse and worse and continues to this day. I guess that's why newspapers are failing: when they can't even please their most faithful purchasers, what hope do they have? They shouldn't tell all those lies.
Anyhow, he decided to scrap purchases of the Boston Globe as his New Years' resolution for 2009. Unfortunately, that resolution did not sick (but it may soon).
I think you know who I'm talking about, readers.