ST Alpha - "how is that in any way an obligation of the NYTimes?" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 154

In response to "my local news radio station had a whole story about people going to great lengths not to be spoiled. NYT could have kept it out of the subject line" by loosilu

how is that in any way an obligation of the NYTimes?

Posted by znufrii Jul 31 '12, 10:58

their purpose is to report the news. this is news.

Responses:

It's news sure but it's info that could have been prefaced with a subject header warning that the email contained spoilers for an even that - Krusty Jul 31, 11:06 19
- Well, the NYT does have an interest in tweaking NBC's nose... -- nm - Ender Jul 31, 11:08
- it could have been, sure, but there is absolutely no reason to expect they should, or would. -- nm - znufrii Jul 31, 11:08 16
  - I expect them to not ruin the outcome of a sports event most people couldn't watch live. - Krusty Jul 31, 11:12 9
    - that most people couldn't watch it live is no fault of theirs. -- nm - znufrii Jul 31, 11:14 8
      - *facepalm* -- nm - loosilu Jul 31, 11:18
      - Come on! They know that their readers can't watch and are likely waiting to watch it tonight. - Krusty Jul 31, 11:18 6
        
        It's the Michael Bolton attitude. "Why should I change? NBC's the one who sucks" -- nm - Roger More Jul 31, 11:21
        
        why would they assume that? For all they know, their readers are following their live blog coverage or streaming it online. -- nm - znufrii Jul 31, 11:21 2
        
        Right. Their audience is at work. - Krusty Jul 31, 11:25
        
        and the ones who AREN"T doing that don't need an alert! -- nm - loosilu Jul 31, 11:21
        
        even our news radio is giving spoiler warnings! -- nm - loosilu Jul 31, 11:19 1
        
        Yup. I listen to 880 CBS and they warn us before giving out scores/results. - Krusty Jul 31, 11:21
  - I expect them to be considerate of their readers. -- nm - loosilu Jul 31, 11:09 5
    - correct. and their presumption must be that their readers want to be informed of the news, otherwise, why would they be reading? -- nm - znufrii Jul 31, 11:10 4
      - If I wanted to see the news, I would go to their site. I do not want them sending me a - loosilu Jul 31, 11:19 1
        
        then don't sign up for email updates. -- nm - znufrii Jul 31, 11:21
      - "Spoilers" in the subject line. I can not imagine this is hard to do! -- nm - The Dark Spawn Jul 31, 11:12 1
        
        Seriously!?! Are they new to tape delay in sports? -- nm - Krusty Jul 31, 11:16
- *event* not even -- nm - Krusty Jul 31, 11:07
and if you don't want potential spoilers from their email updates, unsubscribe. -- nm - znufrii Jul 31, 11:00 4
- You are proving loosi's point though. One would think sending emails that encourage people to unsubscribe is not in NYT's best interest. -- nm - con_carne Jul 31, 11:02 2
  - It's not encouraging them to unsubscribe. It's encouraging them to get the news first. (Also re b2) - Roger More Jul 31, 11:06
  - correct. they send spoilers all the time for prime time events. that's totally not a problem. this one just annoyed me. -- nm - loosilu Jul 31, 11:05
- this is the first one they've sent this olympics. -- nm - loosilu Jul 31, 11:01
yeah, i agree. -- nm - Andie Jul 31, 10:59

Post a message top

how is that in any way an obligation of the NYTimes?

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.