Skip to main content

New York Times Charges Web Readers: Whistleblower Wondering

Image
By
A few months ago, the publisher of my beloved New York Times issued A Letter to Our Readers, which presumably includes many Whistleblower readers.

Non-subscribers to The New York Times will no longer be permitted to use the Times website without limit. I always wondered why they gave it away for free. I have paid my fair share for the past several decades as I wanted the ink and newsprint version in my hands every morning. The Times internet version has been an all-you-can-eat news smorgasbord, where everyone was invited for free. If you build it, and it’s free, they will come. And they did.

Now, frequent freeloaders will have to pay $15 for a month’s subscription to the Times website, still a bargain to gain access to great reporting and hyperpartisan liberal columnists that raise my blood pressure several times weekly. The first 20 articles accessed from the website are gratis. Once you click on article #21, you will be greeted by an invitation to pony up. (Times articles accessed through search engines are not counted toward the 20 article limit, but there are restrictions here as well.)

This gives me an idea.

Why should I be handing out weekly Whistleblower masterpieces for free? I would publish my weekly blog stats here, but I don’t want to provoke envy from überbloggers Kevin Pho and Val Jones, who are racing feverishly to catch up to me. (Just a joke guys. Please don’t retaliate and shut me down!) I put plenty of sweat into these weekly posts and receive only an intangible reward. There is no advertising on the site, and no charge for access. Why am I leaving money on the table?

I was considering asking readers how much they would pay for Whistleblower access, but I demurred as I feared the responses. Here were some proposals that were meandering in my mind.

  • Free access to readers who offer laudatory comments
  • Charge a contingency fee to plaintiffs’ lawyers. My fee would be contingent on the reasonableness of their comments
  • Honor system – pay me what you think the post was worth
  • Readers’ Reward – I pay readers for every new follower they deliver
  • Self-censorship fee – I charge readers who use any of the following 5 adjectives to describe my posts: Absurd, Moronic, Greedy, Idiotic or Jealous
  • Status Quo – Charge nothing and be grateful that anyone invests time to stop in and hear the weekly Whistle.
I hope that readers find their time here worthwhile. If not, contact me and I will be happy to provide you with a full refund.
Labels:

Comments

  1. Toni Brayer, MDMay 12, 2011 at 12:29 AM

    Here is my laudatory comment and I want it free. Whistleblower rocks!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Michael Kirsch, M.D.May 12, 2011 at 12:43 PM

    Only 1 lonely comment on this post. However, quality always valued over quanity. Thanks, TB!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dr. ValMay 17, 2011 at 8:20 AM

    Well... although I don't make much money at what I do, I'm not bankrupt yet (like the Times)? Sadly, people believe that content *should* be free - which means that the world is in a race to the lowest common denominator. It will become harder and harder to support intelligent health writing - and the only voices left will be those with a blog hobby and a medical day job. Not sure what to do about it... Oh, and I hope that I'll continue to have access to your excellent blog - please file this comment under "laudatory." ;-) V

    ReplyDelete
  4. Michael Kirsch, M.D.May 18, 2011 at 8:46 AM

    'Blog hobby and a medical day job'? Sounds like me and I'm happy for both activities. Interesting that there was another laudatory comment on this post that mysteriously evaporated. So, thanks Dr. Val, for your kind comment and support of the written word.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Becoming a Part-Time Physician

By
Next month my schedule will change.  I will henceforth be off on Fridays with my work week truncated to Monday through Thursday.   I am excited to be enjoying a long weekend every weekend.  And while the schedule change is relatively minor, this event does feel like an important career moment for me.  It is the first step on a journey that will ultimately lead beyond my professional career.  It is this recognition that makes this modest schedule modification more significant than one would think it deserves.  As some readers know,   my current employed position has been a dream job for me.   Prior to this, I was in a small private practice, which I loved, but was much more challenging professionally and personally.   My partner and I ran the business.   Working nights, weekends and holidays were routine for decades.   On an on-call night, if I slept  through until morning, I felt as if I had won the lottery.   And w...
15 comments
Read more

When Should Doctors Retire?

By
I am asked with some regularity whether I am aiming to retire in the near term.  Years ago, I never received such inquiries.  Why now?   Might it be because my coiffure and goatee – although finely-manicured – has long entered the gray area?  Could it be because many other even younger physicians have given up their stethoscopes for lives of leisure? (Hopefully, my inquiring patients are not suspecting me of professional performance lapses!) Interestingly, a nurse in my office recently approached me and asked me sotto voce that she heard I was retiring.    “Interesting,” I remarked.   Since I was unaware of this retirement news, I asked her when would be my last day at work.   I have no idea where this erroneous rumor originated from.   I requested that my nurse-friend contact her flawed intel source and set him or her straight.   Retirement might seem tempting to me as I have so many other interests.   Indeed, reading and ...
69 comments
Read more

Will Smarter Lawyers End Frivolous Lawsuits?

By
How do you know if a lawyer is any good?  Of course, they've all passed the bar, but now their profession is lowering it.  While most of us strive for excellence, and raise our children to value this virtue, prominent legal educators are establishing a new quality intitiative for their profession.  Who says that lawyers can't reform themselves?  Perhaps, we physicians can follow their bold example and raise the credentials of our pre-medical students.  I’ll present the facts. You be the judge. I have written a dozen posts on tort reform on this blog, which always generate spirited and adversarial retorts from attorneys and their supporters. They accuse me and other tort reform advocates of carrying water for insurance companies. They repeatedly point out that I know nothing about the legal system and are unqualified to opine on its flaws. They deride me when I argue that effective tort reform would reduce the practice of defensive medicine, despite the re...
83 comments
Read more