What bothers me most about the NYT charging for its News Tracker program is that they’re making their customers pay for for easier accessibility to content — not the content itself.

By discontinuing to freely send out emails alerting their interested, opt-in audience with content the audience has identified as important, they’re disregarding a significant potential they could tap, eventually leading to paid subscriptions or other services (except for the small fraction that will pay the $19.95/year for the service).

Instead, they should continue to take advantage of their readers’ interest and willingness to accept e-mails — these emails, serving valuable functions to the users, also serve an even more important marketing function for the NYT company. I’m not going to (happily) accept emails from the NYT that are soley advertising spam. However, I will glady accept an e-mail telling me there’s content on the site I’ve identified as important to me that may be wrapped in other marketing messages. They’re not seeing the value of these e-mailing features to the overall company.

Charging for secondary accessibility features, rather than the primary content, doesn’t make sense. After I stop receiving News Tracker e-mails, I’ll visit the NYT that much less resulting in less ad revenue for the site, less visibility of their new features and services, and less resonance in their brand overall.