Observations-New York Times Paywall: What everyone else seems to be missing
1–10 of 22 posts
Re: Observations-New York Times Paywall: What everyone else seems to be missing
#2i've not noticed this paywall at all. do anti-tracking plugins (adblock, ghostery, disconnect) zap the cookies or whatever that it uses? or is it perhaps only for americans? (i realise it's not immediate, but i follow links there fairly regularly and have never exceeded any quota).
Re: Observations-New York Times Paywall: What everyone else seems to be missing
#3i've not noticed this paywall at all. do anti-tracking plugins (adblock, ghostery, disconnect) zap the cookies or whatever that it uses? or is it perhaps only for americans? (i realise it's not immediate, but i follow links there fairly regularly and have never exceeded any quota).
It depends how regularly. If you visit more than 20 times a month (in the same browser, see my other comment) then you should hit it.
Re: Observations-New York Times Paywall: What everyone else seems to be missing
#4Another possible explanation is that the way Quantcast and others count unique visitors is broken: they don't (/can't) take into account multiple computers and multiple browsers.
If the NY Times paywall has user-level tracking (I'm not sure if it does, but sometimes the NYTimes asks me to log in to read articles, so it may do) then a bunch of people who are now hitting their quota browsing across multiple machines and browsers with a single login were previously being counted as multiple uniques.
Re: Observations-New York Times Paywall: What everyone else seems to be missing
#5i've not noticed this paywall at all. do anti-tracking plugins (adblock, ghostery, disconnect) zap the cookies or whatever that it uses? or is it perhaps only for americans? (i realise it's not immediate, but i follow links there fairly regularly and have never exceeded any quota).
You might be right that these plugins block cookies or the javascript that informs you that you've hit your limit.
They've tried to make the paywall as permeable as possible. For instance, if you follow a link from twitter or facebook it wouldn't count. But if you went to the NYTimes directly, it would.
The idea is to tax heavy users and those who have more money than time.
It's far from conclusive, but this trend is a disturbing one.
Re: Observations-New York Times Paywall: What everyone else seems to be missing
#6Another possible explanation is that the way Quantcast and others count unique visitors is broken: they don't (/can't) take into account multiple computers and multiple browsers. If the NY Times paywall has user-level tracking (I'm not sure if it does, but sometimes the NYTimes asks me to log in to read articles, so it may do) then a bunch of people who are now hitting their quota browsing across multiple machines an…
The NYT has had user accounts since at least 1999...I've had the same login name as I had about 10 years ago.
Re: Observations-New York Times Paywall: What everyone else seems to be missing
#7i've not noticed this paywall at all. do anti-tracking plugins (adblock, ghostery, disconnect) zap the cookies or whatever that it uses? or is it perhaps only for americans? (i realise it's not immediate, but i follow links there fairly regularly and have never exceeded any quota).
You might be right that these plugins block cookies or the javascript that informs you that you've hit your limit. They've tried to make the paywall as permeable as possible. For instance, if you follow a link from twitter or facebook it wouldn't count. But if you went to the NYTimes directly, it would. The idea is to tax heavy users and those who have more money than time. It's far from conclusive, but this trend is…
Why is this disturbing, exactly?
Do you feel journalists should write articles for free?
Re: Observations-New York Times Paywall: What everyone else seems to be missing
#8Another possible explanation is that the way Quantcast and others count unique visitors is broken: they don't (/can't) take into account multiple computers and multiple browsers. If the NY Times paywall has user-level tracking (I'm not sure if it does, but sometimes the NYTimes asks me to log in to read articles, so it may do) then a bunch of people who are now hitting their quota browsing across multiple machines an…
The NYT has had user accounts since at least 1999...I've had the same login name as I had about 10 years ago.
Notably, though, the account is not required.
Re: Observations-New York Times Paywall: What everyone else seems to be missing
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
The NYT has had user accounts since at least 1999...I've had the same login name as I had about 10 years ago.
Notably, though, the account is not required.
My point exactly. I know the accounts exist, I wasn't sure if they'd made login mandatory after the paywall went up.
Re: Observations-New York Times Paywall: What everyone else seems to be missing
#10You can reach your limit on one browser, then read another twenty on another browser. Despite that I have probably cut my reading in half.
I found the NYT had some of the most relevant ads of any site that I visit. As a result I am clicking on fewer ads and resulting in less revenue for them, but I may be atypical.
The whole paywall has encouraged me to check out other sites for news. The BBC I've found to be terrific and offers background articles on American issues not seen in any US paper.