The Internet has erupted in a self-righteous squall over the recent change by the New York Times to pay-access for articles viewed electronically. A deluge of scathing reviews of the NYTimes app has flooded iTunes. Shrieks of indignation can be heard from sea to shining sea.
As per Captain Louis Renault in Casablanca, "I'm shocked, shocked to find opposition to my free lunch here."
I am simply oozing with sympathy for the hoards of whinging, bloviating freeloaders that have been forced to end their insipid, Robin Hood fantasies.
You are not entitled to benefit from the hard work and dedication of journalists and editors at no cost. There is nothing that special about you as an individual to merit such treatment.
And, no, the fact that your fleshy corpse is capable of sucking in wheezy gasps of Dorito-tinged air is not sufficiently impressive enough to merit a free subscription to the New York Times.
I am a bleeding-heart liberal. I think the Internet is just swell, and that it should be based on principles of openness and freedom. But all of you conceited, whining brats need to get over yourselves.
Also, since you've gotten this far: stop stealing music.
4 comments:
Hmmm... where do I click to pay for having read this?
agreed. but in a predictable twist, this article just inched print media and the NYT a bit closer to its doom.. irony is so underrated
-amorissette69
Jason, rest assured that we're square. By clicking through to my rant I have taken out a $250,000 bank loan out in your name.
Ian, what exactly does all this Nostradamus mumbo jumbo mean? Whether or not the NYT sticks with its $3.95 price point, there is no way that journalists will dance for your amusement like accordion monkeys with mere peanuts as compensation.
I just think that it would be more constructive to work towards sustainable solutions to our newsmedia conundrum instead of maniacally dry-washing your hands on the sidelines.
Post a Comment