[lbo-talk] Cogent commenter on NYT article

[Gar Lipow]

i did not say you have to pay it.. I have nothing against getting
information for free, especially if you would not have paid in any case. I
think it is foolish to describe it as an act of principle.

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Bill Bartlett <william7 at aapt.net.au> wrote:


>
> On 11/10/2013, at 2:45 AM, Gar Lipow <gar.lipow at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Right now, given low ad
> > revenues, the only way the NY Times can pay its journalists, editors and
> so
> > on is to get revenue from somewhere.  We can have all the demands we want
> > about how things should be restructured, but while the system is what it
> > is, it is no more a matter of "principle" to insist that we won't touch
> > information that is not "free" than it is a matter of "principle" to
> insist
> > that we won't eat a hamburger if we have to pay for it.
>
> That's the same as saying we should pay the ransom, or the kidnappers will
> murder the hostages.
>
> What? You want me to buy a Murdoch newspaper, because otherwise Murdoch's
> journalist hostages will be thrown into the street to starve?  (Except
> those who work for The Australian newspaper, which is a protected species
> in the Murdoch empire.)
>
> The argument is preposterous.
>
> Bill Bartlett
> Bracknell Tas
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>

-- 
Facebook: Gar Lipow  Twitter: GarLipow
Solving the Climate Crisis web page: SolvingTheClimateCrisis.com
Grist Blog: http://grist.org/author/gar-lipow/
Online technical reference: http://www.nohairshirts.com