The Agenda

Tooth-to-Tail Ratios in the News Business

Tim Lee dismantles one argument for the New York Times paywall, namely the value of shoe-leather reporting. The truth is that most of what the Times does doesn’t really involve shoe-leather reporting, and the best way to get more high-quality investigative journalism might be to donate money to non-profit ProPublica rather than to dutifully pay for a product sold by a for-profit company.

My own view is that we definitely should not pay for the Times out of a sense of obligation to serious journalism, for all the reasons Tim outlines. Rather, we should pay for it if, well, we want to read it badly enough to pay for it, i.e., if the Times creates an engaging enough experience and a strong enough brand to get people to shell out real money. And as someone who writes for a newspaper that’s trying to persuade people to pay for news presented in an attractive, compelling fashion, I don’t think that this is an impossible task. 

Reihan Salam is president of the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor of National Review.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

ABC Chief Political Analyst: GOP Rep. Stefanik a ‘Perfect Example’ of the Failures of Electing Someone ‘Because They Are a Woman’

Matthew Dowd, chief political analyst for ABC News, suggested that Representative Elise Stefanik (R., N.Y.) was elected due to her gender after taking issue with Stefanik's line of questioning during the first public impeachment hearing on Wednesday. “Elise Stefanik is a perfect example of why just electing ... Read More
White House

Trump vs. the ‘Policy Community’

When it comes to Russia, I am with what Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman calls the American “policy community.” Vindman, of course, is one of the House Democrats’ star impeachment witnesses. His haughtiness in proclaiming the policy community and his membership in it grates, throughout his 340-page ... Read More
Law & the Courts

DACA’s Day in Court

When President Obama unilaterally changed immigration policy after repeatedly and correctly insisting that he lacked the constitutional power to do it, he said that congressional inaction had forced his hand. In the case of his first major unilateral move — “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals,” which ... Read More

A Preposterous Review

A   Georgetown University professor named Charles King has reviewed my new book The Case for Nationalism for Foreign Affairs, and his review is a train wreck. It is worth dwelling on, not only because the review contains most of the lines of attack against my book, but because it is extraordinarily shoddy and ... Read More