Reality Chex & the NYT Paywall -- Part III

As I suggested in Part II, the way I think the Times is handling non-subscriber hits is this:

The Times counts all of your hits, however you get to a Times page. Once you get close to 20, they send you warning notices that you're nearing your max, again -- no matter how you got to those particular Times stories. But when you hit 20, if you link to the Times site via Reality Chex or another Website, you can keep on keepin' on. The purpose of the warning notice, then, is to scare you into subscribing.

If you look at the URL on a Times story you've linked via Realty Chex or another site, it may have some stuff after the <html?> that the Times is using to ID/track where you stand. Next month, you'll go through the same thing. Unless & until the Times changes its policy, don't worry about it.

"Unscrupulous People." Yesterday, I linked to a post by Jeff Bercovici of Forbes, who writes, "The New York Times’s online paywall, the most closely watched experiment in the news business, is working like a charm, say its creators." They already have 100,000+ subscribers. "Meanwhile, paywall dodging has been less of a problem than was anticipated, said Martin Nisenholtz, the Times Co.’s digital chief. 'We’re seeing far less effect from the so-called workarounds than we in fact modeled,' he said. The dodgers aren’t a concern, he said, because 'they’re people who would likely never pay in any event.' And if they turn into a bigger problem, Nisenholtz added, 'we have a broad range of ways to combat these unscrupulous people.'” [emphasis added]

Here's an exchange I had with Bercovici regarding his post:

Constant Weader: 

Interesting, but the Times is still playing headgames with nonsubscribers. I have a noncommercial Website/blog where I have always linked Times articles, & I didn’t change my policy when the paywall went up. According to a letter from the publisher addressed to Times readers to announce the paywall,

Readers who come to Times articles through links from search, blogs and social media like Facebook and Twitter will be able to read those articles, even if they have reached their monthly reading limit.

But when they linked thru my site, my readers started receiving notices that they were on their last (or nearly last) 'free' article. So I wrote to the Times to ask them to clarify their policy. I received a response from one Andrew Smith in Customer Service, who wrote,

All non-subscribers to the New York Times (either a digital subscription or a print subscription) are limited to twenty articles per month.

The behavior described by … your readers when accessing that editorial is consistent with how we designed our new metered model for access to NYTimes.com.

In view of the apparent contradiction between Mr. Sulzberger’s stated policy & Mr. Smith’s letter, I again asked Smith (& I sent a copy to Sulzberger) to clarify. No response.

As nearly as I can tell, based on many letters from readers, the Times is “counting” reader hits, but even after they’ve reached their 20/month max, the Times is letting readers link through my Website.

But they won’t say so.

Bercovici:

I was confused by that myself, and I think they didn’t do a great job of explaining it upfront. Like you, I was under the impression that views via social media and blogs were uncounted, when in fact you can use up your quota that way; it’s just that AFTER your quota is used up you can continue to access articles via those links.

In short, Unscrupulous People, Bercovici and I have come to the same conclusion, no thanks to any confirmation from the Times.