I do not understand what NYT thinks it is doing. It needs to simultaneously remain entrenched in an information system that is no longer viable because of its reputation while exporting itself to a new information system where that reputation is largely viewed as "resting on its laurels" when its laurels have long since dried up and become caked with dust.
I think that they don't get it. The days of putting the columnist over the subscriber are gone.
Columnists should at least be moderating the discussions appended to the bottom of their article-cum-weblog-posts. That is the setting of the new social discourse. Not the office. Not the bar. And probably not school.
But they refuse the discourse because for it to make sense to them they are supposed to be above the fracas. Fourth estate and all that. And that shit isn't going to work any more.
There are millions if not billions of photos taken and shared everyday. There are people writing about news and local current events for free. And they get traction.
Those days where the model of the NYT making money are just gone.