The New York Times will soon start charging to read its op-ed columnists online. The Times is offering its columnists as an all-or-nothing deal, but I proposed that each columnist be priced according to his or her value. I invited readers to allocate a $25 fee among the eight op-ed regulars....An even allocation, I noted, would be a subscription price of $3.13 to read any given columnist online for one year. But not all Times op-ed columnists are equally worth reading. Hence my reader poll....
The Times columnists, in descending order of perceived value:Paul Krugman: $6.90
Thomas L. Friedman: $4.10
Frank Rich: $3.92
Maureen Dowd: $3.42
Nicholas Kristof: $2.35
Bob Herbert: $1.42
David Brooks: $1.39
John Tierney: $0.31
...That the two most conservative Times columnists—Tierney [a libertarian, actually: ED] and David Brooks —are the two lowest-ranking may reflect some liberal bias among Slate readers, or even some liberal bias within Chatterbox himself. (Let he who is without sin…)
"Liberal bias"? No kidding!
Here's how I allocated my $25 (a negative amount means that I'd have to be paid to read a columnist):
David Brooks $100As for Slate, I read it for the same reason that econ bloggers read Paul Krugman: It propagates easily rebuttable Leftist cant.
Maureen Dowd - $100
Thomas L. Friedman $0
Bob Herbert -$100
Nicholas D. Kristof -$100
Paul Krugman $0 (not negative only because he produces easily rebuttable material for econ bloggers)
Frank Rich -$100
John Tierney $325
Net amount = $25
