The time is rapidly coming when Hollywood studios can forget buying all those 6-page spreads advertising their awards movies in The New York Times. Because NYT Chairman & Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr, told the WAN-IFRA 9th International Newsroom Summit in London that there won’t be a newspaper soon. Asked about his response to the suggestion that the NYT might print its last edition in 2015, Sulzberger said he saw no point in making such predictions and said all he could say was that, “We will stop printing the New York Times sometime in the future, date TBD.”
According to news coverage of the conference, Sulzberger also fleshed out plans for the paper’s introduction of a “metered” paywall in early 2011. (The NYT started and stopped its TimesSelect pay experiment in 2007 which was widely deemed a failure.) Readers will be allowed to access a certain number of articles free each month, then will be asked to pay so those who use the site heavily will be charged. He confirmed that the paper will work with Google to implement First Click Free and is also a presence on Facebook now. Many details of the pay strategy are yet to be decided, however. “We are still working on deciding what type of content will count towards the meter,” as photos and graphics may well require different considerations. “We are in the process of conducting extensive research to decide on pricing and the extent of the meter,” he continued, adding that “we will be refining all these policies as we get ready to launch in the near future.”
“Our pursuit of the pay model is a step in the right direction for us,” Sulzberger said. “We believe that serious media organisations must start to collect additional revenue from their readers,” and “information is less and less yearning to be free.” Readers are becoming increasingly willing to buy information on the web if it enhances their lives, he said.
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.



While the end of the physical, printed paper is certainly an emotional gut punch, the truth is this will save countless trees on a weekly basis. The key is getting enough people to subscribe so real investigative journalism will continue…
Trees are crops. No different from corn or wheat or soy beans. Have you ever seen the enormous tracts of tree croplands in the Southeast United States. Paper is largely produced from crops like these. If tree crops cease to be profitable, the lands will be cleared of trees and replaced with other crops that are.
As far as “carbon footprint” goes, the “cap and trade” schemes that many nations are moving to are just a clever way to claim they are reducing emissions by purchasing emission “credits” from countries–such as in the third world–that are not likely to use all of theirs. Does anyone really believe that this will lead to anything like a net reduction in anyone’s carbon footprint? One wonders how it came about that one of nature’s most important and beneficial nutrients managed to get itself classified as a pollutant.
Cheers,
Russ
The demise of the paper newspaper is both a sad and a happy thing, in my mind. I will miss the feel of a newspaper in my hands as much as the next person, but saving thousands of trees as well as the carbon footprint left by their distribution is also something to celebrate. Personally, I think the environmental benefits outweigh the aesthetic loss.
The question is, can the New York Times make enough money to maintain their journalistic standards selling through the internet? I hope so.
“All the News that’s Fit to Tweet”
I’m always willing to pay for information if I get a printed copy.
With the staggering decline of subscriptions, the loss of ad pages, and the paper losing the mantle of distinction it once held, they have been dying a slow death for years. Once they eliminate the newspaper in favor of the internet they will slip into obscurity unable to compete against TMZ and the blogosphere.
Remember when the Sunday magazine section was thick, substantive, and relevant, and not every article in the daily had a political comment or bent?
It’s more than just aesthetics or nostlagia. I find a printed newspaper a far better form of interface than a computer screen. Opening up a paper allows my eye to scan quickly across two pages of print. No scrolling. No links. It’s a much more efficient form of reading news. There are very few things a computer doesn’t do better. But this is one of them.
I’m very skeptical this will ever happen. Very difficult to see how they can make enough money from an online only edition to maintain the journalistic integrity that is their hallmark. I see the environmental upside, but picking up the paper every morning is something that will be sorely missed by many. It’s just not the same online.
i can’t believe the publisher, and heir, of the greatest newspaper in the world, would make such an open ended, and moronic statement. mr. sulzberger, jr. should be out championing the benefits of a printed edition, while embracing new ways 2 deliver the times, 2 it’s readers. art
Well, that will be the end of the NYT completely. Would be sad if the quality NYT of yesteryear hadn’t already disappeared a long time ago.
The end of newspapers is no big loss. Since the New Yorks Times and Washington Post have basically become tabloid journalism for international affairs, it’s no big loss except for those who enjoy want agree with their spin on the news. They should no longer be respected if they’ve this path of journalism.
This is sad news. While I often disagree with the publication’s obvious liberal bias in what should be objective reportage, I will miss their flawless dedication to the English language. I have yet to find an error-free blog (including the NYT’s current online version). As both TMZ and Perez Hilton prove on a daily basis, it is possible to have a hugely successful “news” and entertainment blog without having mastered fourth grade grammar. Besides, I will greatly miss the joy of turning actual pages. A sad day indeed.
Sulzberger has diminished the quality of his paper and brand. Been reading the NYT for over 30 years and the politicization of the news pages and the leftist POV makes the paper less insightful and less credible.
Yay! Pinch kills the print version and it’s just a matter of time before the old gray lady finally dies. Daddy Punch would be so proud.
The print edition of the Times will not disappear any time soon.
It serves a political purpose that is invaluable to the democratic party and others who share their political agenda.
I suggest the NY Times should go find a rich Arab prince who has a few hundred million to lose on the paper.
Wow – going online only is going to be the final nail in the coffin of the Gray Lady. I’m an avid reducer/reuser/recycler, but there’s a lot of other things I’d rather see go first than the NYT. I think, if you’re looking at a tree-by-tree investment, it was one of the few worthy ones out there.
“Readers are becoming increasingly willing to buy information on the web if it enhances their lives…”
Pinch doesn’t just look like a geek, he talks like one. Only a geek would be idiot enough to think anyone in their right mind would pay for something they can get for free – especially in a depression.
Now I know why the Grey Lady is floundering in a sea of red ink; with this geek at the helm, I’m surprised it hasn’t sunk already.
Rupert Murdoch & his cronies at the Wall Street Journal must be celebrating in a drunken frenzy tonight! So now he’s won his war against the New York Times … who’s the angry-old-codger going after next? The LA Times? Chicago Tribune? I mean, Murdoch’s had an anger problem from way-back-when & he infuses all his journalistic properties with it… from FOX NEWS to everything else. It will be interesting to see what his next target is (besides the British & American governments).
Murdoch did not invent the internet or somehow trick people into getting their news online.
“information is less and less yearning to be free.” WTF.
What should happen is for the NYT worldwide network of correspondents to become the Associated Press–United Press–Int’l.News Service-WSJ-Bloomberg-etc. of the future to replace the A.P service as now operative. NYT writers are better than AP member/owner newspapers’ staff people. Then ALL news outlets–print-radio-TV-cable can supply NYT level of excellence to their audiences worldwide.
Carlos Slim must have gotten tired of Pinch wasting so much of his investment on newsprint.
With no print edition, how will people without computers get lies and propaganda?
Very simple answer, Faux News. They will watch, CNN,ABC,CBS,NBC and MSNBC.All the propaganda your heart desires!
“With no print edition, how will people without computers get lies and propaganda?
They’ll still have FOX news.
I am from missouri and the new york times tells me more than my news channels an some times 3 to 6 months sooner! I always did like a enteresting paper!
if it weren’t so ideologically slanted to the left maybe more people would would still want to read their paper…