It's official: In 2011, the New York Times will start charging you for full access to its articles via a digital paywall. See more here. So... will you pay up? Is this the answer to newspaper industry woes?

Shouldn't they be focused on keeping the ad revenue flowing instead of placing that burden on readers? I certainly respect the quality of reporting at the Times, but as long as I have plenty of other free options, I'm not giving Murdoch my money.

Jay Rosen hasn't even taken a solid stance yet, but says, "... this is a very risky move with the very heart and soul of the newspaper ... it's ability to affect and influence the public conversation."

Good luck, NYT. You already lost me.

I never have like paying for things that I can get for free.

I already subscribe to the Times, because I have a need for paper in the morning.

I subscribe to the NYTimes but I love having the on-line access too!

It seems fair to pay something - I think if they keep it cheap enough they will keep most of their subscribers. Will online access be available free to subscribers?

NYT will need to add premium features to justify a paid subscription model for online use that is presently free. It is difficult to un-train a learned behavior - online readers have long ago come to expect free content, and are willing to tolerate advertising to get it.

Absolutely. Good professional journalism is extremely valuable. I've been subscribing to the print version of the times for years, just to support the profession, even though I read online

It's bad enough that I pay for the Sunday rag...the advertising is better than the lead articles!