Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

nirandfar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 89 posts

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#31

Post by eli »

ipsum2 wrote: post #26
eli wrote: post #9

A newspaper isn't a monolith and, by design, the members of the editorial board have very little connection to the business side of the newspaper. You're absolutely right to call out bad behavior of the subscription department, but the "liar, liar" heading is unfair.

> the members of the editorial board have very little connection to the business side of the newspaper And yet you will never see the editorial side write negative things about the business side of the newspaper. People bring up this distinction that there is some barrier between the two, but its a very weak argument, since the incentives of both are the same (to increase the newspapers revenue)

This is the first one that came to mind but I’m sure there are many other examples especially if you include columnists. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/opinion/cartoon-nytimes.h...

I do think the paper made a huge mistake in eliminating the public editor position, which was essentially dedicated to criticism of the paper.

I think you would be surprised with how little the editorial team at newspapers concerns themselves with revenue. It's to the point where it's often actually harmful to the organization.

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#32

Post by dmitrij »

Macha wrote: post #11

I've considered actually subscribing to news media but the behaviour of the NYT and a few known others have left me not to trust the entire industry to behave responsibly with a subscription, so I am at least 1 anecdote of someone not subscribing because of knowledge of the cancellation process

Same with me. In my case, the Economist, who does the same like the New York Times. Subscribing is a click, canceling is a call to a representative who will talk to me about how they "love to discuss a more affordable or flexible subscription option so that you can keep enjoying everything The Economist has to offer" https://myaccount.economist.com/s/article/How-do-I-cancel-my...

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#33

Post by [deleted] »

elefanten wrote: post #18
eli wrote: post #9

A newspaper isn't a monolith and, by design, the members of the editorial board have very little connection to the business side of the newspaper. You're absolutely right to call out bad behavior of the subscription department, but the "liar, liar" heading is unfair.

Given the NYT’s overall style and editorial choices these days, it’s a fair heading more broadly. Prime case in point: They have elevated opinionated moral crusading over responsible and informative reporting. If moral activism is the value the organization purports to elevate, it’s fair to call the organization dishonest when it employs transparently immoral business practices. Whether the editorial board is involve…

[deleted]

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#34

Post by clcaev »

Someone1234 wrote: post #27

If a company does this, I am NEVER subscribing again. Whereas if a company makes cancelling/renewing super painless I'm going to come and go as a customer as it fits my needs. This results in more overall business for the company. I am literally going through this right now: A company called "Ooma" makes dongles that provide voice-over-IP for landline phones (inc. a telephone number), for $10/month with "no contract.…

FWIW, I've been a happy voip.ms customer for a decade or so.

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#35

Post by zepto »

eli wrote: post #9

A newspaper isn't a monolith and, by design, the members of the editorial board have very little connection to the business side of the newspaper. You're absolutely right to call out bad behavior of the subscription department, but the "liar, liar" heading is unfair.

I think it’s entirely fair. If they are so independent, why don’t they critique the NYT itself in the article?

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#36

Post by [deleted] »

elefanten wrote: post #18
eli wrote: post #9

A newspaper isn't a monolith and, by design, the members of the editorial board have very little connection to the business side of the newspaper. You're absolutely right to call out bad behavior of the subscription department, but the "liar, liar" heading is unfair.

Given the NYT’s overall style and editorial choices these days, it’s a fair heading more broadly. Prime case in point: They have elevated opinionated moral crusading over responsible and informative reporting. If moral activism is the value the organization purports to elevate, it’s fair to call the organization dishonest when it employs transparently immoral business practices. Whether the editorial board is involve…

[deleted]

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#37

Post by GhostVII »

Normally I'm not a huge fan of throwing in new laws but I do think it would be reasonable to legislate that unsubscribing from a service must be as easy as subscribing. If we are going to give companies the legal ability to auto-charge you each month, we should give people the legal ability to stop that at any time easily.

Re: The New York Times uses the dark patterns it derides

#40

Post by kcplate »

eli wrote: post #9

A newspaper isn't a monolith and, by design, the members of the editorial board have very little connection to the business side of the newspaper. You're absolutely right to call out bad behavior of the subscription department, but the "liar, liar" heading is unfair.

Sorry but no one who has worked at a newspaper for more than a day believes this.

If a cub reporter wants to run a story that will piss off your largest advertiser, I can guarantee that it will be discouraged by any editor interested in keeping their job.

Been there…

Post reply on HN