The New York Times's Op-Ed: Can the market finally excise this malignancy?

First, I'd like to point out, for you liberals out there who think Conservatives only watch Fox, that my home page just happens to be the New York Times. I believe that, despite its many flaws, it is still one of the best papers in America, and clearly the best paper in America to offer free, unlimited on-line access (The Wall Street Journal does not,) or, atleast, it was.

That's right, starting today, the New York Times will be charging readers a fee in order to read their op-ed columnists. My first reaction was "what a rip," but my second reaction was that it just might be the best thing to happen to the New York Times in a long while.

Finally, the Times's liberal, trash columnists might be kept out of the mainstream. The blogosphere may finally be free from the Socialist rants of Paul Krugman, the worthless exigeses by the know-nothing Maureen Dowd, and the banal dribble which is often passed of as intelligent commentary by Nicholas Kristof.

Only time will tell if the venture will prove profitable, but my guess is that it will, but for other reasons. Likely, very few are going to be willing to shell out a few bucks to read the garbage which the New York Times considers intellectual inquiry. However, without that garbage floating around in plain view, people may once again begin to respect the New York Times. And, with respect, will come an increase in market-share and an increase in profits.

However, the problem with this little charade is that, with only a bit of irony, the Times's little ploy may just garner them enough respect to convince people to pay for their Op-Ed columnists. And, wouldn't that just be a travesty.