NYT
Dying newspaper forced to sell ads on front page, then report on it
The Times would not disclose the rates it charges for ads on the front page. Ordinarily, such space would be coveted by advertisers for its prominence, but it remains to be seen how well it will sell in the current climate, in which ad spending is plummeting.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
They should reserve the space for a plea for TARP funds. Sort of like a PBS funding drive. “Dear friends…”
DerKrieger on January 5, 2009 at 8:46 PM
I thought the front page was wholly owned by the DNC.
Do they get a cut of the take?
Rodent on January 5, 2009 at 8:53 PM
I won’t believe it until I get a third party to verify that the ads are, indeed, on the front page…
AUINSC on January 5, 2009 at 8:56 PM
Can’t wait for the New York Times-Pennysaver merger.
Little Boomer on January 5, 2009 at 9:00 PM
Great blog entry — I almost missed amidst the CPAC and Omaha Steaks ads.
benny shakar on January 5, 2009 at 9:05 PM
I love the detached way it reported on it.
OneGyT on January 5, 2009 at 9:05 PM
Wow. They have no problem revealing classified info about anti-terrorism tactics, but their classified ad rates, that’s a deep, dark secret.
Buy Danish on January 5, 2009 at 9:07 PM
Two things are top secret to The New York Times.
One, its business practies.
Two, Pinch Sultzberger’s SAT scores.
As Ann says, some day, we will get his scores and the world will learn that Pinch is mildly retarded.
__________
RJGatorEsq. on January 5, 2009 at 9:13 PM
They think profit is more valuable than life..
the_nile on January 5, 2009 at 9:14 PM
Not saying much since clearly they don’t value profit.
DerKrieger on January 5, 2009 at 9:20 PM
Their own story emphasizes that they’re acting out of desperation in doing this and you’re comparing it to our standard ads? Did I goof on them for running classifieds, for example?
You’re perilously close to being a troll.
Allahpundit on January 5, 2009 at 9:21 PM
When mocking another’s intelligence, it is wise to check one’s own spelling.
Otherwise it is RJGatorEsq. who will look decidedly retarded.
benny shakar on January 5, 2009 at 9:24 PM
Dang AP. I thought you already knew about Binny.
Guardian on January 5, 2009 at 9:26 PM
In a mere months, the front page will also be the back page!
Buh, bye!
artist on January 5, 2009 at 9:28 PM
Probably really regretting that whole discounted ‘General BetrayUs’ thing.
Hell, they could have taken those fools to the cleaners…
Dumber than a bag of hammers and loaded with money they didn’t earn…
BigWyo on January 5, 2009 at 9:29 PM
Why don’t you shut
yer…you’re…your blow hole douchebag…And yes, you are a douchebag….
BigWyo on January 5, 2009 at 9:33 PM
Cue the bailout request!
PattyJ on January 5, 2009 at 9:40 PM
so Frank Rich, Kruhman, and Dowd really aren’t moneymakers, what a surprise.
rob verdi on January 5, 2009 at 9:52 PM
What’s the next desperate step for this sinking ship, unbiased reporting?
fogw on January 5, 2009 at 10:00 PM
And maybe for every Billion they receive, they send the Treasury a Complete DVD Collection of Ken Burns’ Civil War
Red State State of Mind on January 5, 2009 at 10:02 PM
I gotta give a +10 to the headline writer … GOLD!
ex-Democrat on January 5, 2009 at 10:05 PM
Hey Pinch, get back to work.
ex-Democrat on January 5, 2009 at 10:08 PM
What’s the next desperate step for this sinking ship, unbiased reporting?
One can only hope.
gmoonster on January 5, 2009 at 10:25 PM
Maybe they can charge MOve ON ORG / PAC full price on an ad in the New York Times pages.
wise_man on January 5, 2009 at 11:39 PM
Dying newspaper, indeed, but they are dying with their noses in Obama’s crotch. Maybe they’re going down happy.
Entelechy on January 5, 2009 at 11:51 PM
On the back of Ann Coulter’s latest book, “Guilty”, she mocks the media as “literally wanted to have sex with him [Obama].” The NYT, along with a few other ‘prominent’ culprits lead the way.
Entelechy on January 5, 2009 at 11:57 PM
They should sell ad space in place of the NYT banner. It’s not worth a damn anymore anyway. Why not get a display ad up top and center.
JeffB. on January 6, 2009 at 12:24 AM
I had a roommate in college who had subscribed to the paper (the first person I’ve ever known to do so), and the only reason why he did it was because his professor required all students to bring a copy of it to class every day, no exceptions. I can’t help but think that these are the only people that still subscribe to this rag.
Rainsford on January 6, 2009 at 12:51 AM
LOL! Who will host the Pork-a-Thon? Stephanie Edwards?
PattyJ on January 6, 2009 at 1:05 AM
I wonder if we will see an add on the front page of the NYT from Fox news channel proclaiming its Fair and Balanced status to world sometime in the near future. Now if that happened it really would rub some salt into the NYT wounds.
Dreadnought223 on January 6, 2009 at 2:38 AM
The Times does rely very heavily now on universities for subscription numbers–I’ve seen NY Times and even the local newspaper going for free at the university I’m at. While I refuse to inflict that rag on my students, I do know colleagues who do–I view it as the Times trying to get a captive audience.
The only use I would have for the Times now is as an example of a propaganda organ–Compare and contrast a sixties or seventies issue of Pravda or Izvestia with a current issue of the New York Times would make an excellent essay question.
Matt Helm on January 6, 2009 at 6:52 AM
When you lose relevance, you get to plaster yourself with ads and hope that will cause someone to notice you. They can no longer compete. At least with facts. I’m sure 0bama has a bailout in mind for the Times somewhere down the road.
4shoes on January 6, 2009 at 8:11 AM
I’m with you guys. NYT will get a Dem gubmit bailout, through either the front door or the back door. (I plan to object as loudly as I know how.) Meanwhile the “Fairness Doctrine” will shut down talk radio.
Indeed.
petefrt on January 6, 2009 at 8:50 AM
They think their profits are valueable. Everyone else’s profits are by defnintion obscene.
(Compared to the NYT’s profits, merely making money qualifies as obscene.)
MarkTheGreat on January 6, 2009 at 9:12 AM
Physically impossible, unless Pinch has developed one sided paper. (That would cut down on printing and delivery costs.)
MarkTheGreat on January 6, 2009 at 9:14 AM
The NYT’s front page has been little more than an ad for the DNC for decades.
MarkTheGreat on January 6, 2009 at 9:16 AM