The paradigm is one news outlet having reporters all over the country and the world covering things that may or may not make ripples in financial markets, but may be just as or more important. It's one outlet having the breadth to well cover a breaking event with disparate news aspects (the Japan earthquake being a good example) that touch all manners of people and businesses across the globe. Every decent-sized metro daily used to have bureaus in Beirut, Israel, Egypt, etc. There are plenty of reasons, some of them good, that this is no longer the case. The New York Times is one of the last vestiges of that age and I don't think that nostalgia is the only reason we should root for its success.

The only thing that guarantees that success, as Rupert Murdoch has pointed out, is sustainable profitability. I think the Times' move to charge people for their coverage will ultimately be successful, just as the efforts of the FT and WSJ have been and, to a degree, as NPR's has been.

At the top bracket. At its lowest, its $195.

http://www.nytimes.com/content/help/account/purchases/subscr...