"Yeah, I pay more for Warcraft, then I’m going to end up paying for the Times. I think there can be a good debate over whether the Times’ model will work. (Times Select was a terrible model, for instance) But I don’t really see the argument for the paper never asking readers for money."

Paying for Information - Ta-Nehisi Coates - National - The Atlantic

I think the New York Times is a pretty good paper, and when it really drills into things, its often quite useful and insightful.  It can also be as dumb and useless as any other news organization out there, and it gets no free pass.

Between those two points I find myself pondering the argument I’m seeing that paying for the Times is, basically, paying for good journalism.  And I almost buy it. Setting aside that I can probably get more bang out of giving the $15 a month to NPR, I really am taken by the idea of paying to support the journalism I want to see.

But there’s a gap of trust, of perception, that I can’t quite cross. I want to spend $15 a month to be part of the solution, but I feel like I’d be spending $15 a month for business as usual.  And for business as usual, I can continue to get by on the free content.

But I’ll make this deal:  if paying for the NYT means that somehow the comments section becomes habitable by human beings, then I am willing to consider that money well spent.