Is an article published a month ago in the NYTimes too old for the front page?

October 4, 2001 10:01 PM

Statute of Limitations?. The discussion was quite good. It's a timeless topic, still will be relevant 500 years from now. BUT! And it's a big but: I read this article when it came out in the NY Times about a month ago. Can't you presume, correctly, that countless others read it then?
posted by raysmj to Etiquette/Policy at 10:01 PM (4 comments total)

The article, by the way, is from the NY Times Magazine dated Sept. 9. Sounds at first glance, then, that the article might fall under the category of "Articles You Should Have Read, and Would Have, If You Had Not Been Preccupied With the WTC/Pentagon Disaster Instead." But the magazine officially goes online every Sat. at midnight, EDST. Consequently, I first saw the article on Sept. 7, five days before 9.11.
posted by raysmj at 10:10 PM on October 4, 2001

I think it was ok to post. Not all of us read the Times devotedly.
posted by owillis at 10:56 PM on October 4, 2001

raysmj,

Time/dating is not really an issue in the guidelines ... the main thing would be if it's interesting. and whether or not mainstream people folk have seen it before.

judging by the response ... i'd say that it was fairly unseen up to this point.
posted by a11an at 5:28 AM on October 5, 2001

Also, to be fair, although the NYT is available in london it coasts about £6. That's an awful lot of money.

And yes, I should read it online, it's much cheaper. But good link, it ceratinaly enriched my day.
posted by nedrichards at 5:57 PM on October 7, 2001