One more reason not to read the NY Times...

As if their biased and shoddy reporting and slanted editorials weren't enough, the NY Times is going to start charging you to read their stuff on the web. Article from ABC News says that the Times is struggling with their business model as their readers move to reading the paper on the web.  So the Times is going to sock it to you with $15/month charge if you read more than 20 articles a month. $15/month?  You gotta be kidding me.  Arthur Sulzberger says this should be considered an investment in The Times, "one that will strengthen our ability to provide high-quality journalism..." Well, that would be a nice change - high quality journalism. 

Seriously, $15/month is ridiculous. That's half again as much as what the Wall Street Journal charges for both their print and online editions.  And I don't want to pay for that either. Most of the news available on the NY Times is available elsewhere at no charge.  

I'll probably still check in occasionally.  I like David Pogue's column and some of the Tech articles are interesting, but its nothing worth that kind of coin. Its not that I expect to get everything for free.  Its just hard to understand the arrogance of the NY Times that thinks they can charge an outlandish price for something that is so easy to get for free. 

If the NY Times is having trouble with their business model, even with all the ads, and they think its because readers are moving to reading the paper online, I think they need to re-evaluate where their readers are really moving to - and its probably away from reading the NY Times. 

Posted via email from greg-c - on the go....

What would Will Rogers think?

Howdy, 

In Oklahoma, like most places I'm guessing, "food stamps" are now distributed on a pre-paid debit card with a Visa label on it. I think this accomplishes a couple of things. 

1. It helps the self esteem of the recipient that they have a Visa card just like everyone else and when they're buying something at the store, they don't have to suffer the indignity of handing out real "food stamps". 

2. It lets the recipient purchase his/her liquor easier. Most liquor stores take Visa and probably prefer it over cash which can be lost in a hold-up. 

3. It lets the recipient re-fill their casino cash card easier so they can get back to playing the slots quicker. 

All of this has been well documented in the local papers. 

For a while, there was talk about how the use of this card would cut down on fraud and such. But I think items 2 and 3 above kind of dispel that notion. 

This weekend while I was standing in line at the grocery store checkout, I noticed a poster at the register that was alerting the users of these cards that the days on which their card would be "re-filled" by the state would be changing to help ease the burden on the grocery stores (probably the liquor stores too).  The poster had a picture of the card with an explanation that the new "re-fill" date would be based on the card number. 

What struck me was the irony of the image on the card. Does anyone else see this? 

The card features a picture of Oklahoma favorite son Will Rogers, a well known pundit of his day with his home spun common sense editorials. ("I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Republican")  Now the pic of ol' Will has him scratching his head, almost like he is thinking "Now what the heck did you say this card was for???  Where does this money come from and where does it go???" 

I have no problem helping those that need it until they can get on their feet. But when I'm standing in line at the grocery store and the lady in front of me is fishing out 3 or 4 of these cards from her purse to pay for her groceries, I'm kind of like ol' Will scratchin' my head. 

Posted via email from greg-c - on the go....