Disabled Vietnam Vet Hot Dog Vendor Arrested Outside Met
Stuy Pyro Leaves Notes In Hieroglyphics
Photos of D Train Murder Depict Bloody Panic
Tenants' Rights Flash Cards!
Family Gets Early Christmas Gift From Ellen DeGeneres
After two years in service and almost as long as media gossip fodder, Times Select, NYTimes.com's service that offered access to the rich archives of the New York Times through a paid subscription modeled, is officially dead. The service put certain current online content behind the Times Select wall, such as columns by Op-Ed writers, and there was much criticism, even from within the Times, about restricting access the paper.
There had been rumors about the decision for weeks, and now the Times explains the shift as being prompted by the realization that they can make more money from advertising revenue by opening up the archives than from the $7.95 a month/$49.95 a year service. NYTimes.com senior VP and general manager Vivian Schiller said, "“What wasn’t anticipated was the explosion in how much of our traffic would be generated by Google, by Yahoo and some others." The Times now expects a bump in traffic with demise of Times Select.
Here are some Times Select facts and figures from the press release:
TimesSelect was launched in September 2005 and, two years later, had approximately 787,400 active subscribers. Approximately 471,200 received TimesSelect free of charge as a benefit of their home-delivery subscriptions, while 227,000 paid for online access and another 89,200 received it for free on college campuses through TimesSelect University. During its tenure, TimesSelect provided exclusive online access to news and opinion columnists, including all the Op-Ed columnists appearing in the print version of The Times.The newly opened areas will be sponsored by advertisers, the first being American Express.In addition, TimesSelect gave readers unlimited access to The Times archives dating back to 1851, placing The Times's daily chronicles from the past at the touch of a mouse.
This content, including columns, articles, blogs, videos, podcasts and audio recordings, as well as online research and storage tools like News Tracker and Times File and archival access back to 1987, will now be freely available at NYTimes.com. Many of these benefits did not exist on NYTimes.com prior to TimesSelect.Archival access between 1851 and 1922 will also be freely available. Archives for the years 1923 - 1986 are available to be purchased in single or 10-article packages.
Home delivery subscribers to The Times, who received TimesSelect as part of their print subscriptions, will have the same unrestricted access to the site that other readers will have, but will also have access to the complete Times archives from 1851 to the present.
What do you think of the news? Did you use Times Select, or were you counting the days till it went away?
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
FINALLY!
Times Select was doomed from the start. Props to them for learning, instead of blindly sticking with a bad idea.
I hope the Wall Street Journal is paying attention....
Does that mean students who had Times Select access for free no longer have free access to the archives from 1923-1986?
Not like I knowingly need access to them, buts just good to know.
I've subscribed to TimesSelect since the start; does this mean that I'll get a prorated refund?
#4, no, just back to 1987.
TimesSelect was a horrible idea. I don't know one person who actually used it.
I subscribed from the get-go, and was happy to give out my login and password to anyone and everyone.
"I hope the Wall Street Journal is paying attention...."
Actually the WSJ is profitable with it's online subscription service.
#4, don't listen to #6, who obviously wasn't paying attention when reading the article.
You get free access from 1851-1922 as well as from 1987 to the present. It's only the years 1923-1986 that you must pay for.
i used it, liked it, but am glad it's gone, because it restricted too much from too many.
*Does that mean students who had Times Select access for free no longer have free access to the archives from 1923-1986?*
What exactly is your question? Why would students not have free access while everyone else will?
Reading comprehension! Looks like you need to read more.
#9, this is #6. I didn't bother to address 1851-1922 since #4 simply asked about 1923-1986. I read the article, plus the "Letter to Readers" regarding this in today's Times.
As a current TimesSelect subscriber, I expect to receive more info in tomorrow's email.
Yeah BOY! Now I have access to liberal crap that disses George Bush and his tired war on terror but with a more balanced look than fox. Who cares. News sucks balls now. The only good news is from TMZ. I like knowing when britney is gonna commit suicide.
Everything's free except for 1922-1986? Anyone want to hazard a guess as to how they chose those dates? Maybe someone even knows for a fact. I suppose I could do some searching, but learning is hard.
Why is everyone so mean to previous posters?
#11, before you go insulting other people's reading comprehension, maybe you should read their questions more carefully! The 1923-1986 archives are the ones that you will have to pay for by article. With Times Select students got free access to everything.
I worked for the NYTimes.com customer service team during the launch of TimesSelect and let me tell you it was not well received. Even by those who got it for free with the Home subscription. There was lots of confusion and a lot of loyal computer illiterate subscribers who felt genuinely alienated, especially the op-ed enthusiasts. I loved the service, partially because I got it for free and partially because unlimited access to the Times archive is like being in Kiddie City all over again. But when I left there and lost my access, I felt as sore as all the customers that I had been paid to coddle too. I'll close with the sentiment of so many of the angry and jaded readers who wrote to us in the wake of TimesSelect, "If the Washington Post can do it then so can the Times."
Here's how Tom Friedman described the situation:
"I was in Dubai contemplating my navel when I started wondering why I wasn't more widely quoted on the Internet. I am, after all, a leading columnist for the world's greatest newspaper and I thought that I should be read by more people who would appreciate what I had to say. I spoke with my editor, and he said that Times management agreed that I was one of the best things about the Times and that my word should be spread far and wide. I am therefore very pleased that I can now be read for free because my worldwide contacts tell me that I am worthy."
I'm so glad that Times Select is over. Gating the column and blog of Nick Kristof and his teammate Naka Nathaniel -- when their reports are so terribly important to get out into public consciousness -- was inexcusable. Now that it's no longer behind the wall, pay attention people! http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/
You can access NYT back to 1861 online with a New York Public Library card. Look into it.
#10, I agree.
I have used it as a student. But I would link it on my blog and numerous readers could not access the articles (mostly op-ed) columns I linked to because they were neither subscribers nor students.
when will it be open to the public? i want to look at it now, but it's just offering me my 14 day free trial...
The NYT is still advertising that they charge for "Times Select"
http://www.nytimes.com/membercenter/faq/timesselect.html#timesselectqa2
1923-1986 are not in the public domain, therefore they're still under copyright and one must pay for their use. If you need access, I hear there's a great library at 42nd St & 5th Ave.
This is great news! But what I'm wondering is this, what do black guys do all day?
Free access to the archives is worth far more than the cost of a subscription. Yes you can access it through other means, but the Times site makes it so easy.. I love the Times, love the archives. I understand that the crossword puzzle is the biggest moneymaker. That is still charged separately online.
[19] Actually, you can't. You have to go to one of the branches to get the full archive. It's not available online.
About time Gothamist was on this story. I mentioned it last night.
I got my Times Select copied and pasted for me by a Times employee. Psych!
Times Select pissed me off. I REFUSED to join. I wrote them many times to protest. My favorite Times Select piece (which I only read the preview of) was the one by Joyce Purnick, who decided to give "more exposure" to the underexposed murders of several Chinese women during the Imette St-Guillen coverage -- nice place to give more exposure, Joyce, on TimesSelect! Duh. Like who did she think was paying to read that one?
Nice try, you suckas at NYTimes! Nice way to try and revamp the newspaper industry, by double-charging readers who buy the paper version to read on the subway or in the park, and then want to check out an article online.
I cannot tell you with what GLEE I greet this news.
about time.
I was a subscriber. "To thank you for your loyalty, we are offering you complimentary access to Times Reader from now through December 31, 2007." Oh gee, thanks. Kind of like the free ticket I got to the free tour of my neighborhood Curves.
Now, can the New York Times PLEASE get rid of registration? Until they do, I will continue to use bugmenot.com.