How do you read the NYTimes?

June 12, 2007 7:26 PM

How should I be reading the NYTimes? I subscribed last month and I love it, but I only end up reading about five to ten percent of the paper every week.

I really enjoy the Science Times every Tuesday, and I also like the Book Review and the Magazine in the Sunday paper. Is there anything else that comes on a specific day that I should be looking for? Also what is your general routine for reading the paper? What are all the little nuances that you have when it comes to folding and putting the paper back together, what do you do with the blue bags etc.? Should I be recycling all the old papers? I'm just trying to get more out of the experience, any advice is valuable!

posted by pwally to media & arts (19 comments total)

i read it online, and subscribe to times select, which i think is worth it. i just couldn't justify going through that much paper every day, especially when there are sections i never read.

you should certainly recycle the paper; not sure what good the little bags are, though.

i would make a habit of always reading the editorial and op-ed pages, as well as the first section. also, always do the crossword. keeps senility at bay. :)
posted by thinkingwoman at 7:34 PM on June 12, 2007

not sure what good the little bags are, though.

Dog poo!!
posted by librarina at 7:35 PM on June 12, 2007

"The Experience"? It is a newspaper not a ride at Six Flags. Let's see, I usually browse through the Business Sunday, Week in Review and read the Style section. I also make sure to read the wedding announcements so I can find out just how bad I am doing economically, socially and in the dating department.

The news section is okay, but is rather irrelevant if you have an Internet connection. The only reason I, and my friends, read the New York Times is for the gems like "Cocaine is making a comeback" and "Two nannies a must in households" and the complete lack of self-awareness from any other paper in the country.
posted by geoff. at 7:36 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

It's not a ride at Six Flags? yikes thanks for the jab.
posted by pwally at 7:39 PM on June 12, 2007

I get the NY Times and LA Times everyday. My wife and I live in LA, and we read the paper with tea & coffee each morning. We enjoy sharing what we read and discussing it.

I keep the bags to pick up our dogs poop on walks and save the papers to give to the local pet store for cage lining.

IMHO, reading the paper on paper is much better than online. With a paper, you will see things you would normally miss online. There is value in a editor bringing you stories and photos that you wouldn't normally encounter.

Also, you can take your paper with you to a couch, bathroom, to the park, to the office to read at lunch, etc. Lugging a laptop around just ain't the same.
posted by Argyle at 7:49 PM on June 12, 2007

On Sundays, I like to go through the entire Sunday Times. And I have a specific system. Local News sections first (with fluffy "The City" section going 2nd), Front Page section last, the rest of the paper piled in between in ascending order of how interested I am in each section. This will change from week to week, depending on content. Order is determined before I start reading any of the sections by a quick scan of the front page of every section. The second to last section is often the Arts or Sunday Styles Section. I will read the Sunday paper in any order if necessary, but I enjoy it the most when I'm able to skim and organize it first.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 7:51 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

I read the soft news first - depending on the day, it could be entertainment, book reviews, the Sunday Magazine. Then, I delve into the harder stuff....that's usually the Business section/topics. After that, it's the hard news of the nation and around the world. (That is, if any of it is still relevant, since I've been reading for about 3 hours.)

And if there's any way to do it, I leave the NY area news for last, so I can dream I'm there instead of my current location. For some reason, if the same type of event happens in NYC as would happen in my area, the far-away version sounds so much more interesting.

Regarding your other questions:

1. I've never been able to adequately re-fold this beast.
2. I try to recycle it when done, but I've been keeping a few days worth to use in my charcoal chimney for the backyard grill.
posted by fijiwriter at 7:53 PM on June 12, 2007

Just live with it for a while. In my experience, no two people read the Times the same way. Think about it: One issue of the New York Times contains more information than a person can digest in a week. You have to pick and choose, placing your attention carefully.

My personal habits: Front page, a quick turn through the A section, close attention to the editorial page and Op-Eds. A glance at the Metro section. Totally ignore sports. Peruse the front page of business to see whether anything interests. Always read the special section at a medium level (look at all pages, read items of interest closely), with special favorites being Science, Dining Out, and Weekend.

The Sunday paper requires an entirely separate strategy. It's like a seven-course meal - you don't gobble it all at once. Basically, I first remove the 'guts' or 'good part.' Then I dutifully read the A section and Op-Eds as always. That out of the way, I sort through the good stuff. The best parts are saved for last - my best parts are Sunday Styles, Travel, Book Review, and Magazine. I read all the other fluff sections first, casting them upon the floor as I finish with them. Then I carefully dole out the best parts over the latter part of the day. The Magazine, with all its density and crosswordy goodness, often gets saved over for completion 'til Monday.

The Times is a beautiful experience. You'll find your technique. Just keep exploring for a while. It has to fit into your life somehow. The most important thing to know is this: no one expects you to read all of it; in fact, that would be an unpleasant chore. Read the parts you love. Get to know your favorite writers and columnists. Track single sections carefully. Ignore with no compunction the parts that don't interest you.
posted by Miko at 8:46 PM on June 12, 2007

Dining and Wine section on Wednesdays is superb! The Travel section (Thursday?) is great as well. These are my two don't-miss special sections.
posted by donknotts at 9:22 PM on June 12, 2007

but I only end up reading about five to ten percent of the paper every week

it's hard to do more. just read what you like and what you have time for.
posted by caddis at 9:45 PM on June 12, 2007

I'm a fast reader and read almost everything in the NYT--though not the chamber music and dance articles in Arts and only the horse racing, human interest and scandals in Sports. Weekdays I scan sports, then read the front, metro, business (tues science, wed dining, thu home-- then styles, fri escapes), then arts. Special sections go after business. Saturday I read sports, front, business, then metro because it has the arts section. Sunday:auto, sports, front, metro, week in review, business, real estate, travel, city, style, arts, book review, magazine (the special magazine goes first). I get the paper delivered and Sunday's real estate, travel, arts, book review and magazine(s) are included with the Saturday paper; if I'm current I'll read them in that order. Right now, I'm two weeks behind. When I lived in Boston, I bought the bulldog editions of the Globe and Herald at midnight, read them in an hour and went to sleep When I first moved to NY I was also buying Newsday because I wanted to read the advice columns and the comics and it seemed to be the least sensational of the tabloids, but I was getting too much of a backlog (there are too many other things to do in the city), so I stopped. Reading comics online hurts my eyes, so I buy the collections of my favorite strips when they're published.

In North America, I used to read the local paper of whatever city I was in when I traveled, but now I just pick up the local Thursday paper for the arts listings and buy the NYT for my main news.
posted by brujita at 10:09 PM on June 12, 2007

I don't read the NY Times in print every day (only only, thanks), but I do every day read the Wall Street Journal, the Oregonian and the paper I work for. Getting through three newspapers a day, I have to be strategic. Here's my approach:

I read the headline and first sentence of everything that's on the front page. Most of the time, I either already read a version of that story the day before, or the headline and first sentence tell me every thing I care to know.

Then I leaf through every page of the front section, scanning A2 and A3 more carefully than the rest, because sometimes some pretty good stuff still lands there.

Next I do the same thing with any other news sections (world, local, business, etc.). Sometimes I look at my stocks or check the foreign exchange rates of countries I've visited in the business section. Business sections often have surprisingly interesting news and good columnists, so I watch these carefully.

I at least read the headline and first couple sentences of any newspaper-written editorial, because these things can be influential. I can't usually bring myself to care about columnists or letter writers on the op-ed pages, but I at least glance roughly to see if anything catches my eye.

As I'm going through the paper, I try to stay alert to really good writing and really compelling topics. Sometimes I get so caught up in the goal of getting through it that my eyes glaze over, and its worth it to be in the moment when you're handling a newspaper. If I see something that looks good but I can't force myself to focus yet, I set it aside to return to later.

I pretty much ignore the sports section, unless there are articles about the team my husband follows or about things that I might like to do.

With the main life/features section, and any other lifestyle/food/literature oriented sections, I try to look for really interesting ideas: things to do/eat/read. If the paper has comics, I check the one or two strips I care about. I read my horoscope. I set aside the crossword puzzle for later.

Once I get through the whole paper, I go back to the articles I set aside. If I have time, I read them. If I don't have time, I put them in the bathroom or on top of my purse to guarantee that I'll see and read them later.

As I read a paper in print or online every day, I love the fact that I get to recognize certain bylines. I know I can trust this product reviewer and that health columnist in the Wall Street Journal, that this New York Times reporter is so good at covering local government that I'll read his stuff even if I don't care about the subject matter, that a certain Washington Post education writer is one of the best writers on his beat in the country, that the Oregonian has 300 reporters but seems to give the same six people all the best assignments. It's fun. Newspapers take on personality and start to feel like part of your family.
posted by croutonsupafreak at 10:30 PM on June 12, 2007

only only=only online

oops
posted by croutonsupafreak at 10:31 PM on June 12, 2007

The magazine is great, especially went compared to the LA Times magazine and the Washington Post magazine. Long live William Safire's On Language!

The Dining section is so much fun. There was a fantastic article, with accompanying recipes, on the best brownies in the world recently. Read the corrections section everyday, just to get a good laugh at how many errors make it through the editing process.

Keep a look out for columns by Frank Rich on Sundays. Maureen Dowd is fun and has occasionally sharp columns, and Paul Krugman is always angry--which is completely justified.

Throw the too-frequent "T" magazine right into the recycle bin. Big waste of paper.

The movie reviews are usually good, as are the TV reviews (although Alessandra Stanley is notorious for making mistakes). Michiko Kakutani's book reviews are priceless.

One of the main problems with the Times is that it puts such a focus on the wealthy lifestyle. For news, the Washington Post is on par with the NY Times, perhaps even a bit better. But taken as a whole, the Times is superior and unrivaled by any paper in this this country.
posted by HotPatatta at 10:34 PM on June 12, 2007

Croutonsupafreak-
I totally agree with you. Once you start to recognize bylines, it makes reading the paper so much more enjoyable. The fun thing about the Times is that you can get caught up in the drama of the paper's operations by reading Editor and Publisher and Romenesko, and scads of other outlets for media criticism.
posted by HotPatatta at 10:37 PM on June 12, 2007

I have to disagree with this Times-fest. I stopped reading it a few years ago mainly because it does not cover international or finance news as well as I would like and because it is just too big with too many ads. I read the Financial Times, which which I can compleately read in 45 minutes on the way to work. They have people called "editors" who make sure that stories are fairly contained and who, in most cases, make sure that there is only one article on each story.

They also, unlike the times writers, do not pretend to be ignorant on the topics they write about. At the end of today's story about US backing for Musharraf they simply say that "The shift in priorities has left the Bush administration open to charges of hypocrisy as it backs the Muslim world’s most powerful military strongman in support of its goal of establishing democracies throughout the Islamic world." which is clear, simple, correct and not hedged around with competing quotes from experts.

Their arts coverage is good, but there isn't as much of it as I like and I usually pinch the metro section of the NYT from someone else in the office.
posted by shothotbot at 5:35 AM on June 13, 2007

Another vote for Financial Times, with the same caveats - though Mrs Jones tells me that fashion sections tend to be several months ahead of the curve. (The occasional glossy inserts for the super rich can be annoying, but you do have to remember their core audience.) Also, if you can take the slant, try the Wall Street Journal- read it now before Murdoch gets ahold of it.
posted by IndigoJones at 5:45 AM on June 13, 2007

Ms Booth and I have a Sunday-only subscription and that's just about right for us. In the past we'd get through only about half of it and recycle the whole thing, unread, when the new one came. But we've gotten into a nice habit of sitting on the front porch with it (and gin and tonics) on Sunday afternoons. (I get some headlines and the op-eds via daily email.)

She only picks up the sections she's interested in, while I go through every section, even though I just flip through Sports and just scan the headlines in the front section. I spend my quality time with the book review, the magazine, and the Arts section.

We haven't figured out a system for stacking what she's read and what I've read and what neither or both of us have read. We just have an unread stack and a read-by-at-least-one-of-us stack.

We use plastic grocery bags for our dog poo. We use the NYT bags for last week's paper, then toss them in the recycling bin.
posted by booth at 6:55 AM on June 13, 2007

I used to have a full week's subscription to the NYT (now only Sunday) and completely miss it. For one, reading it online forces you to be much more linear: "Next Article in Business", "More in International". The thing I like about the paper paper is that you can skim and discover interesting articles you'd never search for.

However, if you only read 5-10%, it may be worth just getting the Sunday for, yes, the experience of it (nothing beats coffee, mimosa, and Sunday Times) and then just jumping around on the site for any special sections you like, opinion columnists you follow, etc.
posted by sfkiddo at 7:28 AM on June 13, 2007