News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The New York Times reaches 1M digital only subscribers. Parent comment

Re:The New York Times reaches 1M digital only subscribers by saturdaysaint on Monday October 05, 2015 @01:40PM (#10333409)
Is there any evidence that a Beatles album is of any higher quality than a Vanilla Ice album?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The New York Times reaches 1M digital only subscribers by a3n on Monday October 05, 2015 @01:53PM (#10333505)
Yes. Sunday mornings on my local AM oldies station is a Beatles program, featuring songs, old interviews and factoids. Probably lots of stations around the country carry it or similar.

Do the thought experiment. Will there ever be a Sunday Vanilla Ice program forty years after Vanilla Ice was current? I really doubt it.

(Ask a question, you risk responses. :)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The New York Times reaches 1M digital only subscribers by lcswi on Monday October 05, 2015 @02:10PM (#10333630)
That's just a measure of popularity, not quality (however that could be defined).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The New York Times reaches 1M digital only subscribers by a3n on Monday October 05, 2015 @02:45PM (#10333885)
Popular music is entertainment. People wouldn't listen to it if they weren't entertained. They're probably entertained.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The New York Times reaches 1M digital only subscribers by ceejayoz on Monday October 05, 2015 @02:09PM (#10333613)
Thought experiments resulting in "I don't think something will happen in the future" aren't evidence.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The New York Times reaches 1M digital only subscribers by dexterdog on Monday October 05, 2015 @02:10PM (#10333633)
How does that mean the quality is better?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The New York Times reaches 1M digital only subscribers by justathrow2k on Monday October 05, 2015 @03:24PM (#10334167)
If we define the metrics by which we judge quality, then possibly yes, possibly no.
[ Parent | on HN ]