Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator

by Ryan Holiday

But incentives can be changed, just as the New York Times showed in switching from the one-off to a subscription model under Adolph Ochs. In order to survive as a quality publication, the New York Times is redefining its economics once again. The recent implementation of their controversial paywall (which limited readers first to twenty free articles a month and then to ten before requiring them to pay for more access) is a lesson in great incentives. According to economist Tyler Cowen, it means that “the new NYT incentive is to have more than twenty must-read articles each month.”2 The Wall Street Journal and other publications have harder paywalls—and guess what? Subscriptions are increasing. How absurd that under the current model—the one that most publishers are sticking with and believe in—there is no imperative to produce these must-read articles, only must-clicks. The New York Times recently announced they once again make more total revenue from subscriptions than from advertising. A deep-pocketed donor just agreed to subsidize on $1 million worth of New York Times subscriptions for students. This is all very good news. Whether it will be replicated, or whether it can be, is another question. Would you pay for most of the crap that is created online? I wouldn’t.