[Foundation-l] WSJ on Wikipedia

[altally]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen at 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