Comments:New York Times to start charging for access to web news

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

Maybe we'll have less biased sources like Wikinews take its place!

Agreed, I know nothing about this particular newspaper but the format itself is dead - people buy them for something to read on the train, fill their heads whichever kind of biased spin that their polical leanings prefer and as a flag to other people showing the way that they think.

Wikinews can be slow but it offers a great way to discuss and debate the issue (even if I'm not usually submitting the intelligent views).

just to clarify when I say the format is dead, I mean that people buy them for thier own political spin on a story they would have heard about already or in the near future or a story that only a paper with certain political leanings would print - NOT for a just the facts quick review of world events as it arguably should be...make your own minds up people

I agree. Less commercialised news sites are important nowadays, what with all the newspapers being tabloid-like in some way. Kayau (talk · contribs) 15:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)