my own private I dunno: résumé | screenplays | fan fiction

The new face of Sunday afternoon

| | comments (6)

Used to be, I would spend most of a Sunday reading The New York Times, which made for a pretty relaxing day of lazing around, drinking tea, and flipping through just about every section of the paper (except for sports). But that was years ago now -- I read news online today, and the idea of newspapers kinda makes me laugh: Who wants to read yesterday’s news today on a dead tree when you can read today’s news now with no sacrifice required of Arboreal-Americans?

But last year, I got the crazy notion in my head to try to reclaim those lazy Sundays, since Sundays have morphed into just another work day for me now, and so I ordered the weekend edition of the Times, which means that on Saturday you get the Saturday paper and all the sections of the Sunday paper that aren’t supertimely, like Arts & Leisure and the Book Review, and all the coupon circulars and such. And then on Sunday you get the Sunday newsy sections. And after three months of papers piling up and never getting read -- and after the revelation that the Times had withheld a story the previous November about Felony No. 8,455 of the Bush Administration because the paper’s editors were worried it would influence the presidential election when that was precisely what it should have done, and rightly so -- I cancelled my subscription.

The paper kept on coming, every Saturday and every Sunday.

I called the Times to confirm that they had received my cancellation and would no longer be charging my credit card for the paper. They assured me they had received my cancellation and would no longer be charging me.

The paper kept on coming. I kept not getting billed for it.

I called again. Yup, the Times had me down has cancelled, nope, the Times would not be billing me in any way.

That was a year ago. The paper keeps coming. I keep not being billed.

At some point I realized that, with the state of frantic worry dead-tree publications are in these days, I must be so valuable to the Times as a name on a roster of subscribers that it’s worth more to send me a free paper every Saturday and Sunday than the money the company would save by NOT delivering these papers to me. The newspaper trade publication Adotas reports:

The Newspaper Association of America states that daily newspaper circulation is down 13% from its peak of 62.8 million in 1985.

I’d actually be surprised if that figure hadn’t been massaged a bit -- newspaper circs are down only 13 percent? I bet it’s more like 25 or 30 percent... or even more.

Why else would the New York Daily News have hawkers giving away papers on streetcorners in Manhattan every weekday? The smell of sweaty desperation is getting pretty rank.

Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times, touched on his paper’s troubles in a Q&A with readers online:

[W]e hope and believe the Web site -- whether by selling ads or by selling subscriptions -- will make more money. The long-range future of the NYT, and of quality journalism in general, depends on that. Our newspaper, because of its national market, is in sturdier financial health than many of our competitors, but the cost of everything we do is going up faster than the ad and circulation revenues that support our work. More and more, we will count on our digital journalism to pay a greater share of this amazing news organization.

So I wonder whether Keller saw it as a good thing or a bad one when Jack Shafer had this to say in Slate recently:

I'm Canceling My Times Subscription
Why you should, too.

Hello, New York Times? I'd like to cancel my subscription today. No, I'm not protesting your Middle East coverage, your treatment of any ethnic minority or weird religion, and I am certainly not upset about some petty delivery problem. Nor am I angry about the gruesome picture you recently printed on Page One or your deletion of my favorite continuing feature.

I'm canceling because the redesign of your Web site, which you unveiled yesterday, bests the print edition by such a margin I've decided to pocket the annual $621.40 I currently spend on home delivery.

I wonder if Jack is still getting the paper, too. The coupons for toothpaste and cat food continue to be nice, but hauling all these dead trees out to the recycling bin is a pain the ass, and I’m building up some bad karma with the Ents, I suspect. I wonder what I’d have to do to get them to stop sending the paper already...

6 Comments

I continued to get the Times for a year and half after canceling. Not a very good business model they have there.
I'm actually still a "newspaper guy," and read the Washington Post every day. For me, there's still something about the random-access nature and "scannability" of print that give paper an edge. Though tellingly, I seldom actually use the Post for actual *news* anymore. I read the "A" Section the same way I read Pravda back in the day. In both, nothing appears that doesn't have a specific propaganda purpose - in one case, for the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, in another for Washington Democrats. Great comics page, though. FWIW, anecdotally, I've seen a *lot* of these "I try to cancel the paper, but they keep sending it and never billing me" stories (many regarding the Los Angeles Times.) It really does sound like they're desperate to pump up those circulation numbers.
Though just looking at the NYTimes.com site, it is pretty impressive, like they're finally figuring out how to put the newspaper format on the Web. Compare it to the wretchedly horrible design of washingtonpost.com, which is more or less unreadable. Can you figure out what's supposed to be "important" on their front page? Or find Stephen Hunter's latest movie reviews without devoting significant time and brainpower to puzzle through the task?
The thing you must remember about newspapers is that the money they take in from people actually buying the thing doesn't really amount to much. They basically just set the prices just high enough to ensure that the people who buy the papers are likely to read a reasonably large chunk of it so that they have more reliable numbers to report to their advertisers, who are the ones who really pay the bills. You're probably still receiving the paper simply because the loss they take printing up and delivering an extra copy is more than offset by the fact that the more people they have reading the thing, the more they can charge for ad space.
You're contradicting yourself, JSW. If charging for the paper is meant to ensure that the people who pick it up actually read it and hence the announced circulation numbers are accurate, then wouldn't the corollary be true, that people who get the paper for free should not be considered readers? Like I said, even when I was paying for the paper, it wasn't getting read -- it still isn't getting read now. What I really want to know, I guess, is whether the Times is counting me among paid subscribers, a year after I stopped paying, or am I counted among the "free copies distributed" number. I'm sure advertisers would love to know.
the NYT website may look bright and fancy -- as if they've actually *done* something -- but it is difficult to maneuver, they have dropped many favorite features, they've got a myriad of mis-spellings, grammatical errors and just plain badly written leading paragraphs in their articles. many old time columnists who were expert in their field have been led, by the rings through their noses no doubt, to try "blogging" without taking into account that blogs are an organic feature and requiring thought and originality -- they cannot just be the new column for writers like Eric Asimov and Thomas Friedman. it's dressing up mutton as lamb as far as i can see, and the one and only really good thing about a paper edition of the Sunday Times is advertising. hear me out -- there are often ads or press release type listings that make note of concerts, readings, and off-off broadway theatre that just are too out of reach on the past and current websites. print may be dying, but trying to make it something it isn't, while ignorning the few strengths that it has, isn't going to save it.

Leave a comment


I'm MaryAnn Johanson, writer and editor, and this is my scratch pad, idea-jotter-downer, portfolio and resume, and general hang-out blog.

• film/TV/pop culture critic at FlickFilosopher.com
• contributor, Film.com
• member, Online Film Critics Society
• member, Alliance of Women Film Journalists
• member, International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences

[become a Facebook fan]
[visit my personal Facebook page]
[follow me on Twitter]


Location: New York City
[email me]

photo by David Speranza

archives

recently at FlickFilosopher.com

Powered by Movable Type 5.01

what I’m watching
(region 1)

what I’m watching
(region 2)

what I’m reading



my book
(Amazon U.S.)

my book
(Amazon U.K.)