Group items tagged

A comparison of the New York Times website between February 18, 1999 and January 15, 2014 reveals more than a few amusing differences: the older site includes "on the Web" in the title, the increasingly user driven results on the modern page (most emailed headlines, personalized weather reports, customized alerts), the search function on the old site buried halfway down the page, almost as an afterthought. Most telling, however, is the great focus on the digitized version of the paper in the modern incarnation. Specifically, there are ten unique buttons on the front page offering unlimited access to the site, with new and improved usability. The shift from paper to digital media is clear here. Sales of the physical paper are low, as more people choose to access media via personal devices. Naturally, when accessed from one of these devices, the site redirects the user to a mobile friendly version - a stark, pithy version perfect for the instant absorption of a few headlines. In this way, the 1999 version of the site foreshadowed the NY Times' decision on March 2008 to use the second and third pages of its physical copy for article abstracts, as Nicholas Carr points out in his article "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" The front page is made up of only abstracts that lead to the longer, less efficient articles. The 2014 site has kept this standard, only now including user defined popularity in articles, as mentioned above. Overall, the trending is as would be expected - greater personalization, monetization of access, and interactivity (a few more imbedded videos). These changes speak to a larger shift in how the user access media - the decline of the paper copy and an old institution rallying to survive modernity.

thanks for the reflections on this news and information juggernaut! The long obsolescence of print seems clear in your observations here. A complementary study might look at the 'migratory patterns' of NYTimes readers in terms of their info-consumption habits, preferences and motivations for adapting to the screen

The FCC has ruled that Internet Service Providers (ISPs), such as Comcast and Verizon, are permitted to charge internet companies (Netflix and Youtube, for example) a fee to enable high-speeds for their users. The FCC has determined it is legal for an ISP to determine the amount of bandwidth given to websites. The implication to this ruling is that these websites will be forced to pay additional fees to ISPs in order for their websites to have continued or improved streaming speeds. Unfortunately for consumers of the Internet (i.e. everyone on earth), the costs websites pay for improved bandwidth will be passed on to them. The FCC's ruling gives mega-corporations the ability to censor, control and influence the Internet. The open Internet as we know it is dead. Net neutrality is dead. Wyatt, Edward. "In Policy Shift, F.C.C. Will Allow a Web Fast Lane." The New York Times. The New York Times, 23 Apr. 2014. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.