As I write this, the stock price of New York Times is trading below the cost of a weekly subscription. They’re losing money like it’s their job.

It’s no surprise that newspapers are dying, they report on it themselves fairly regularly. But…I’m really confused why they’re throwing gas on their own fire? Wherever I turn (actually, it’s usually when I turn to page 3) publishers are teasing me with story headlines, and then telling me to ‘read this story online…’.

Um. I’m holding the paper (paying for it, even). I don’t WANT to read your publication online.

I get it. It’s cheaper to publish some of the content online, plus the (hypothetical) ad revenue from the limitless pixels to pawn off might make web-only content alluring….but they’re wrong.

And they’re alienating their customers.

I like to read the newspaper…you know…the actual newspaper. Sure, I read news snippets and short articles online, but to really ‘read’ a story, I prefer the printed page. Heck, if there’s a long article online, I print it out to read (yes, I know that’s really stupid, and yes, I do recycle).

I’ve even proven to publishers that I’m willing to pay for the privilege of the printed word; we get 2 1/3 newspapers delivered weekly (I’m being charitable and counting St. Louis Post Dispatch as a third), and stacks of magazines.

Why then, do they force me online to read their content? I can barely tolerate the new format of the new Rolling Stone (a much, much smaller “more traditional” format rolled out Oct 30 of last year), but I like it a helluva lot better than reading online.

I guess I’ll have to learn to read online (like you). Or buy a better printer…