"Printing The NYT Costs Twice As Much As Sending Every Subscriber A Free Kindle"

[LDB]

I'm not passing judgment on anyone, merely voicing an opinion on a particular thing.

[Ann in Arlington]

Sorry LDB, calling something worthless is, in my book, passing judgment.  Your point would have been made as well by simply saying "I don't care for NYT; I prefer the Washington Times and sure wish it was available on Kindle." 

Ann

[LDB]

Opinions are judgments. Judgments are opinions. The original commenter sounded like he believed my opinion was toward a person when it was toward a thing. If we have become so sensitive and so PC that we can't have hard opinions regarding things/objects on the chance it might possibly by chance maybe perhaps potentially trouble someone then we've got insurmountable problems.

[geko29]

Long ago I read the Book section of the NYT online every Sunday. Once I tried and got the message that most of the content was "Paid Subscriber Only". This was several years ago; I haven't tried since. I look forward to this Sunday's.  

Yeah, all NYT content, including archives going back to the 19th century, have been free since mid-2007.  They used to charge $49.95/yr or $7.95/mo, but gave that up.

[Cowgirl]

Opinions are judgments. Judgments are opinions. The original commenter sounded like he believed my opinion was toward a person when it was toward a thing. If we have become so sensitive and so PC that we can't have hard opinions regarding things/objects on the chance it might possibly by chance maybe perhaps potentially trouble someone then we've got insurmountable problems.

I couldn't have said this better.  Thank you

[Chad Winters]

Ahh someone who labors under the misapprehension that the classical view of tolerance is still acceptable 

Classical view: I may disagree with you, but I respect you

Postmodern view: You must accept all truth claims because there is no truth except what you decide is true for you. Except if you beleive something strongly that is different from me....then I will hate you and throw rocks.

http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5359

[ProfCrash]

I find that words are rarely the problem but that the tone is the problem. If people are discussing a subject and you call that newspaper worthless, twice, it comes across as condescending. If people are discussing a subject and you say, I would love to have paper x on the Kindle because I don't read paper y you make your point without sounding condescending.

Political discussion in the US would be greatly improved if people focused on the tone.

[LDB]

I only used the term worthless once, not twice, however that's another branch on the tree of "change" that we exaggerate those things we no longer want to find acceptable just as "reporting" and "journalism" is no longer a matter of neutrally presenting facts but now is molding the facts into the "change" desired, whether newsprint vs. e-ink or whatever the story is.

[ScottBooks]

I only used the term worthless once, not twice, however that's another branch on the tree of "change" that we exaggerate those things we no longer want to find acceptable just as "reporting" and "journalism" is no longer a matter of neutrally presenting facts but now is molding the facts into the "change" desired, whether newsprint vs. e-ink or whatever the story is.

Speaking of neutral facts, doesn't your original post in this thread assume that the article came from the NYT? (Or other "mainstream" media)?

Not that anyone asked but, here's my two cents...

I wholeheartedly agree with the tone comment. I buy the Washington Times 2 or 3 times a week; I subscribe to the Washington Post. They each have their good and bad points but I wouldn't call them either of them worthless. Doing so in a public forum would imply that anyone who read them had poor judgment while in reality they might just have bad taste  . Or value things differently from the way you and I might. It's an obfuscation of name-calling.

[LDB]

Actually my original post didn't assume this to be from a mainstream media source. Rather, it suggested that just as they do this particular person chose to "report" in a decidedly slanted fashion that leads to their desired conclusion. Certainly anyone that chose to could say they consider the Washington Times nothing but birdcage liner and the NYT the finest journalism available anywhere and I wouldn't consider it a personal insult in any way, merely their opinion.

[Betsy the Quilter]

If we're discussing our opinions and our considerations, my opinion is that I wouldn't consider any of the last several comments to be on topic.  (Which was rather whimsical, I thought; too bad it had to get weighed down.)  Free Kindles for everyone!  A Kindle in every pot!

 

Betsy

[geko29]

A Kindle in every pot!

Nooooooooooooooooooooo don't boil my Kindle!

[Betsy the Quilter]

 

[coyote]

There is an interesting article in Business Insider that states that the NYT could save some money by switching its subscribers to Kindles.  And in fact, that's why my husband got me a Kindle... our NYT annual subscription ($540) was the same price as a Kindle ($360) plus the annual Kindle subscription ($180).  In essence, we got the Kindle for free, and we're reducing out carbon footprint.  (Of course, we can't share the paper over breakfast, but he's more of a New Yorker man.)

coyote

[Zeronewbury]

I had heard that publishing cost item.  Do you find that the NYT Kindle version satisfies your need?  I'd miss the crossword!

[coyote]

I had heard that publishing cost item.  Do you find that the NYT Kindle version satisfies your need?  I'd miss the crossword!

I was worried when Dan proposed getting a Kindle version of the paper.  I take a lot of pleasure in the folding, the shuffling, and the sorting out of the 'chaff' (like the sports section!)

In actuality, though, I love it.  It took me about three weeks to stop wiping my fingers constantly on my napkin, and I often found myself worried that I would get ink smudges on the nice white Kindle.  The navigation is very nice, and I can easily flip through articles until I find one that I find interesting.  So far (since the Kindle 2 shipped) I've gotten the paper every morning without fail.

I am not a crossword person, but I do know that you can subscribe to the NYC crosswords online. ;-)

coyote

[pidgeon92]

We have a topic on this already.... I'm going to dig it out and merge these together.

[davem2bits]

I am not a crossword person, but I do know that you can subscribe to the NYC crosswords online. ;-)

I went thru three monitors before realizing the online version was too expensive.

[MichelleR]

I'm not a "crosswordsy" person, so I love my Kindle subscription to the NYT. It's actually the only subscription that is not a bit of a let down, and I look forward to reading it each day when I wake up and the world has started to make enough sense for me to comprehend anything.