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

The desperation of NYTimes

rozumem.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 331 posts

Re: The desperation of NYTimes

#321

Post by Starman_Jones »

nailer wrote: post #320
Starman_Jones wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else. Given the events of the past week, this letter really comes across as nothing more than public grandstanding.

What events?

Since Bari Weiss took over CBS News, there’s been a number of controversies involving corporate interference to nix or promote politically-charged stories. Most recently, at 60 minutes, a lot of senior journalists were fired. The touchpoint seems to have been that they pushed for journalistic independence and maintaining the long-form “gather all the facts” investigative journalism that the show was known for, while corporate leadership was pushing for them to “get with the new way of doing things.”

Re: The desperation of NYTimes

#322

Post by ethagnawl »

wfh wrote: post #266
ethagnawl wrote: post #54

The UX anti-pattern of theirs which really grinds my gears is the "Continue reading in the app -- it's better." modal which appears when reading articles on the web. There does not seem to be a way to permanently opt out of it. I'm sure I could use GreaseMonkey or whatever to dismiss it for me but I mostly read articles on my phone, which makes any of that harder. The larger point, though, is that I shouldn't have to…

I emailed them about this and they said they would consider removing it. But need more people to complain. If you are a paying subscriber please let them know! There is power in your voice.

I couldn't find a direct email or submission form, so I went with a Bluesky message. Hopefully these drops in the bucket amount to something.

Re: The desperation of NYTimes

#323

Post by dataflow »

godshatter wrote: post #317
dataflow wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a fascinating hill to (with some assumptions about your political leanings) choose to die on. Does the logic go something like "the country may be dying while owing over $100,000 of debt on my behalf, but I'm not gonna let scummy newspapers get in the way with O($100) from my wallet?

It's possible to care about more than one thing at a time.

It's also possible to exercise some strategic discretion in acting on instances of the things you care about, no? There are so many similar hills to die on. It's not like there's a shortage of scummy companies you can retaliate against, if you that's the crusade you enjoy.

Re: The desperation of NYTimes

#324

Post by Melatonic »

Centigonal wrote: post #68
dieselgate wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I respect your opinion but am grateful for and find tremendous value in my NYT subscription. I share it with my SO and read their articles constantly. Prior to getting a subscription I was a "turn js off" kind of person - which is fine I suppose and still do it for other sites. I do not maintain any streaming or other subscriptions outside of Deezer (and a Garmin GPS FWIW). I would like a Bloomberg subscription but t…

This is an interesting topic. If a company does something you approve of (e.g. do journalism) and something else you disapprove of (e.g. make canceling hard), is there a good way to signal both as a consumer? This is also relevant in the context of companies like Target, which has been boycotted by both sides of the US political spectrum for various reasons.

Automatic script that subscribes and unsubscribes every month and uses AI to waste their time on the phone as much as possible :-)

Re: The desperation of NYTimes

#325

Post by mynameisvlad »

dangus wrote: post #315
mynameisvlad wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A transactional message is something like "Thank you for signing up" or "Your password was changed" once per transaction. Hence, transactional. Regardless how much they and you want to spin it, this is a 14 day marketing campaign. A single transaction (ie. subscribing) should not result in 14 emails sent. And certainly not one a day. By that logic I can send you unlimited emails because you bought one thing from me o…

No, my logic specifically said that the emails have a defined end and that makes them transactional. You can’t extend my logic beyond my specific boundaries. I would say I’m not even trying to spin it. For all I know the emails say “here is the user manual for our app” or “thanks for signing up, please enable 2FA as soon as possible.” The author of the blog post never actually detailed the contents of the email. You…

Marketing emails are send to existing and new paying customers all the time, it's exceptionally strange that that is the line you decide to use to determine if something is marketing or not.

Once again, regardless how you want to try and spin it, nobody signs up for a 14 day marketing campaign willingly, and subscribing is in no way shape or form an indicator of said acceptance. Most people would bat multiple eyelashes at any service that claims that is a transactional email and some might even be so put off they don't decide to subscribe or, like the author, are so frustrated that they'll likely unsubscribe because of said marketing spam. That right there is already indicative of how helpful and necessary these emails are.

Not sure why this is the hill you're deciding to die on but this ain't it.

Re: The desperation of NYTimes

#326

Post by comfysocks »

epistasis wrote: post #3

NYTimes is predatory on subscriptions. Over my long lifetime I've subscribed twice, and regretted it both times with intensity. Any place that allows easy instantaneous subscription by a simple web form, but makes you call and talk to a person during limited business hours for cancellation , is a toxic place. I've been told they have stopped this predatory practice due to some newly passed laws or something, but they…

I hate this kind of thing too, but realistically this is every newspaper/digital that I’ve subscribed to ever. In a way, I get it. The new media landscape has put traditional news organizations in an existential crisis. I would hate to see world where the only way they could exist is under someone like bezos.

Re: The desperation of NYTimes

#327

Post by dangus »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #325
dangus wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, my logic specifically said that the emails have a defined end and that makes them transactional. You can’t extend my logic beyond my specific boundaries. I would say I’m not even trying to spin it. For all I know the emails say “here is the user manual for our app” or “thanks for signing up, please enable 2FA as soon as possible.” The author of the blog post never actually detailed the contents of the email. You…

Marketing emails are send to existing and new paying customers all the time, it's exceptionally strange that that is the line you decide to use to determine if something is marketing or not. Once again, regardless how you want to try and spin it, nobody signs up for a 14 day marketing campaign willingly, and subscribing is in no way shape or form an indicator of said acceptance. Most people would bat multiple eyelash…

12 million subscribers don't seem to mind. But I guess that is "nobody" in your eyes.

I'm not dying on any hill, I'm just factually pointing out that emails that have a defined end date are by legal definition able to be categorized as transactional.

I must apparently point out again and again, the author of the article never posted the content of the messages so for all we know they are 0% marketing.

Re: The desperation of NYTimes

#328

Post by dangus »

havaloc wrote: post #83
dangus wrote: post #48

Not sure what the author is bitching about. They’re a one-time series of email messages over 14 days. They are transactional emails. Maybe the author doesn’t agree with that but they’re welcome to take NYT to court over it. Is their email provider charging you per email or something?

And you should have the right to stop them immediately. I don't see how that's controversial.

The CAN-SPAM Act only covers a specific type of marketing email with a specific set of rules. It doesn't cover emails that fall under the explanation that NYT provided.

The author of the blog just didn't accept the explanation.

This would be like if I just wrote a blog post and complained that every company sending me an email about updating the terms and conditions and I just called it "marketing" because I didn't know better.

Which, again, the author never disclosed the content of the email, only their opinion that they were marketing emails, when NYT's explicit description was spelling out the fact that they were one-time transactional emails that end in 14 days.

Re: The desperation of NYTimes

#329

Post by 7777777phil »

dieselgate wrote: post #10
epistasis wrote: post #3

NYTimes is predatory on subscriptions. Over my long lifetime I've subscribed twice, and regretted it both times with intensity. Any place that allows easy instantaneous subscription by a simple web form, but makes you call and talk to a person during limited business hours for cancellation , is a toxic place. I've been told they have stopped this predatory practice due to some newly passed laws or something, but they…

I respect your opinion but am grateful for and find tremendous value in my NYT subscription. I share it with my SO and read their articles constantly. Prior to getting a subscription I was a "turn js off" kind of person - which is fine I suppose and still do it for other sites. I do not maintain any streaming or other subscriptions outside of Deezer (and a Garmin GPS FWIW). I would like a Bloomberg subscription but t…

You probably already know this but sou can get a lot of Levine’s writing without a paid Bloomie subscription by subscribing to his Money Stuff Newsletter.
Post reply on HN