On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi,
Given that the WSJ is making a lot of noise about moving all its content
behind a paywall and is planning to remove its headlines from the "prying
eyes" of Google, I think it is appropriate to honour their wish and no
longer consider the WSJ as a verifiable source. It is appropriate because
it
is the direct consequence of their actions.
When this means that the blogs are part and parcel of this wish, then we
should not try to circumvent this even when they write about us.
Thanks,
GerardM
We should ignore them because they want to get paid for their work?
Why? Frankly, I think the NY Times and other companies should require
payment for much of their work as well. I'm willing to pay for their
content, its worth it.
Nathan
Why should they make their website free to all anyway? Bit stupid for a
business to do that when they could be making money.
And furthermore, I have generally found books make better sources than
online newspapers.
--Majorly