Joho the Blog
|
|
|
November 11, 2005
IndependentSources runs a chart of Paul Krugman citations now that he's been moved behind the New York Times pay wall. It is what diminishing influence looks like. The post also points to a Kaus post that wonders if the NY Times would have taken an offer of $6.1 million — what it's made in subscription fees — to diminish its influence. [Tags: media] Posted
by D. Weinberger at November 11, 2005 10:37 AM
|
Comments
I subscribed to Times Select for Frank Rich, and in a big drop to second place for Maureen Dowd. Nonetheless, she's on book tour now, so no columns. Shouldn't we subscribers be getting some kind of refund?
Posted by: Ann | November 12, 2005 08:31 AM
Not that this means anything.
How many people read Paul Krugman...
a) Directly?
b) Forwarded by email?
c) Through the new media gatekeepers (TPMCafe et al)
d) Through the long tail linkers?
How much really is (d) out of the whole? This would have to be considered along with the BlogPulse numbers. And you'd also have to consider whether the readers via (d) have any consequential influence themselves.
Also, consider the bias of selective linking among (d). Here's Robert Cox, president of the Media Bloggers Association, conjuring up a policy for not linking to TimesSelect:
"I don't link to TimesSelect for the same reason I don't link to The Wall Street Journal; it is behind a pay-wall so most TND readers can't follow the link. Generally, if I can't link a web page I don't write about a web page."
A silly policy, one that he abandoned later that day by linking to John Tierney.
Posted by: Jon Garfunkel | November 13, 2005 09:00 AM