Putting the online edition of what may have once been the most prestigious newspaper on the planet behind a paywall (hoping that old reputation would finally make people shell out the money)
seems to have failed abjectly.
Not only does nobody read it, the articles can no longer be deep-linked, quoted with a reference, or listed on the page of the freelancers that wrote them. Signals can no longer be boosted. Behind that paywall, a newspaper goes back to being what it was before the advent of the internet: - a monolithical entity talking to itself, instead of part of the worldwide web of professional news sources and bloggers that process and amplify breaking news and background information. And yes, each of us is a part of that.
Only The Times no longer is.-
Are we missing it at all? Will we quote it again when it takes down the paywall?
I never quoted it much; I recently tried to because that's
where quote from the snarky statisstics professor came from, but when I got to the paywall, I simply turned back and found something else to link to. Cursing the paywall as I went, and writing off the Times as a potential news source...