文章批评《纽约时报》强制用户接收无法退订的营销邮件，认为这种强势做法暴露了其绝望心态。作者本不介意付费订阅，但被连续5天的强制邮件激怒，特意取消了自动续费。这种违背用户意愿的营销手段适得其反，反映了传统媒体在困境中的短视。

标题：《纽约时报》的绝望营销

我最近不慎订阅了《纽约时报》——仅仅为了阅读一篇付费墙后的文章，而当时找不到更便捷的替代方案。每月2美元的费用尚可接受，但付费后的遭遇令人不悦。

在接下来的5天里，我收到了5封强制性的欢迎营销邮件，且无法退订。更令人反感的是邮件页脚的声明：

您将收到这组为期14天的必要订阅信息。由于这些邮件涉及您与《纽约时报》的订阅关系，无论您是否选择接收营销邮件，都将强制接收。

这绝非巧妙的营销话术。这种操作让我感到被冒犯，也暴露出《纽约时报》的绝望姿态。为此，我特意检查并关闭了自动续订功能——讽刺的是，若他们提供退订选项或保持沉默，我可能根本不会如此警惕。

作为重视电子邮件礼仪的从业者（我的企业也将邮件作为重要增长渠道），我始终坚持在每封营销邮件底部放置退订链接，Gmail用户还能看到一键退订按钮。即便在事务性邮件中，我也会提供账户注销入口。这些举措非但不会阻碍增长，反而能维护发件信誉、净化邮件列表，让用户感受到自主权——这在当今商业环境中尤为重要。

我的企业收入远不及《纽约时报》，但尚无需采取如此绝望的营销手段。当百年大报开始强塞无法退订的邮件时，这不禁让人质疑：新闻业的困境已严峻至此？抑或这只是《纽约时报》独有的病急乱投医？

以下是评论内容的总结，平衡呈现不同观点并保留关键引用：

1. 对NYT商业行为的批评

   • 订阅陷阱与取消困难："Any place that allows easy instantaneous subscription...but makes you call and talk to a person during limited business hours for cancellation" (评论2)
   • 强制营销："When I sign in, NYtimes asks me to subscribe to other services, even though my subscription has access to the article" (评论4)
   • 自动续费问题："NYTimes was the only subscription...just sitting there collecting money when we thought we'd canceled it" (评论12)

2. 用户体验问题

   • 侵入式设计："they put videos on the front page that autoplay and can't be paused" (评论8)
   • 应用内广告："ads in articles for paid subscribers? Cancelled it" (评论22)
   • 强制应用跳转："Continue reading in the app -- it's better.' modal which appears when reading articles on the web" (评论25)

3. 为NYT辩护的观点

   • 商业成功证明策略有效："the New York Times is the most successful news organization basically in all of North America" (评论18)
   • 订阅数据增长："The New York Times Reaches Three Million Digital Subscribers Outside the U.S." (评论19)
   • 性价比认可："NYTimes is actually great value for the $4 I pay. I think they have the best photography" (评论29)

4. 行业普遍现象

   • 企业普遍行为："It's not just them...Every interaction I have with a store or site signs me up for some promotional thing" (评论9)
   • 营销策略有效："If being user-hostile in tech created real consequences, Facebook would've shuttered 15 years ago" (评论20)

5. 替代方案建议

   • 图书馆访问："check if your public library offers digital access" (评论26)
   • 转向替代媒体："subscribe to Breaking Points or try them for free on YouTube...more honest approach" (评论6)
   • 小额支付建议："I wish we could just have microtransactions to buy access to individual articles" (评论17)

6. 内容质量争议

   • 报道偏见："their aim is to produce content for that [liberal leaning] audience" (评论6)
   • 战地报道争议："their behavior since the start of the Gaza genocide has been particularly disgusting" (评论28)
   • 质量下降："the quality of the journalism absolutely plummeted around 2020" (评论27)