41–50 of 89 posts
You drain user trust for short term gain. What is the point of continuing to take someone's money if they no longer use your product? If someone doesn't want my product, I sure as hell don't want their money and would be embarrassed if they ever paid by mistake
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.…
I cancelled my Netflix at the same time and have come and gone several times since, as they make it as easy as possible.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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]
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.
Indeed. Obviously it's bad that the NYT is using these dark patterns. But it would be worse if the NYT would just stop to cover dark patterns, because of that. It's a sign of a working separation between the journalistic and business sides.
How is author not including his own employer in the article a sign of separation.
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...
I called to cancel. I was offered $14/month promotion, and then after I agreed to the deal and gave them credit card they said I will be charged $14 every 4 weeks. I said agreed to $14/month, that's not the same as $14 every 4 weeks, because $14/month is $168 per year, but $14 every 4 weeks is $182.49 per year. They said they will charge $14 every 4 weeks, and I decided to cancel because of their scammy offer.
For years, every AT&T and Comcast salesperson I talked with quoted me megabytes per second instead of megabits per second. They would insist that they were right if I ever asked them to clarify the units of measurement. One time the salesperson was so sure that he was right that he conferenced in a tech support person…who informed him they did not sell megabytes/second, only megabits. The salesperson was very confuse…
For example people will often say give me that liter of wine, when in fact the bottle it’s 750ml and not a liter per se.
I don't understand how dark patterns like these are ever a good long-term business strategy for a company You drain user trust for short term gain. What is the point of continuing to take someone's money if they no longer use your product? If someone doesn't want my product, I sure as hell don't want their money and would be embarrassed if they ever paid by mistake