Dear NY Times,
It’s me, Jon. I know we haven’t talked in a while, since I haven’t had a paid subscription in a few years now. But I just thought I’d write you a note to let you know why that is.
I am a big fan of your content; it is consistently high quality and well-composed. You’re not perfect, but you’re easily among the best sources for news on a daily basis. The problem is, there’s not really a good way for me to give you money for this; at least not a way that I currently find acceptable.
Now, I really don’t need a hard copy of your paper. I’m certainly not going to start carrying it around, and it would basically go unread. I can get the same content through other methods, and am far more likely to. But ok, what about the “Saturday and Sunday” subscription plan? I still probably won’t read most of it, but I may peruse it on a lazy Sunday morning, and I can read the magazine during the week. However, my main motivation here is not to get a giant pile of newsprint regularly delivered to my apartment; it’s to support the creation of the content I’m already getting for free.
The “Saturday and Sunday” subscription costs $3.15 a week, or about $160 a year. Hmm, well, that seems a bit high. For comparison, my New Yorker subscription is $40 a year, or about $0.75/week or $0.85/issue. But fine, The New York Times certainly is delivering more content, and has a much larger staff and more topics to cover. Say I’m willing to pay $3.15 a week to be a subscriber.
But wait! That’s not the actual cost, that’s just what I’ll pay for the first 8-12 weeks, until the rate doubles to $7.30 a week. That, for the record, is practically the cover price. Now, I guess it probably costs a lot of money to pay all those contributors, print out hundreds of pages, and deliver it to people’s doorsteps. So I can sort of understand where you’re coming from. Still, there’s no way I’m paying that much.
And so here we are: I am getting most of the benefits of your content, and you’re getting none of my money. I want to help finance the writers and researchers and editors, but not so much the unnecessary tree-killing and delivery mechanisms. I guess next year you’ll start charging for reading more than some number of articles per month online. Which is maybe a step in the right direction. But shouldn’t there just be an “Online Subscriber” option? I’d even throw in some extra for you to mail me the magazine.

