Oops, my bad.

I just plain old didn't realize it until Joanne pointed it out last evening. (thanks Joanne!) . I have posted stories here that were published on subscription only sites. I know that many of you are put off by subscription sites and you will not read an article rather than give them your personal info.

There is a solution to the problem. Of course you could always subscribe. Before I knew there was a another way I did subscribe with almost real information though I always enjoy posing as a 90 year old man (figuring that 90 year olds are not an attractive demographic group to advertisers) just to throw the whole subscription thing off a bit. I have free, online subscriptions to the NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, and Chicago Tribune. However I don't even bother with them if I don't have to. Instead I use a handy little tool called Bugmenot.

So go the Bugmenot web site, and read all about it. Decide whether you'd rather give a newspaper your personal information so that they can target ads or whatever else they want, or if you would rather use Bugmenot. Some people have a moral problem with evading subscription. I don't have a problem with it for the reasons outlined here.

BTW, I have no problem with what sites like Salon do -- ask you to watch an "ultramercial" (several screens of info with a multi-part ad for a sponsor) and get a day pass to their premium content. That is a fair trade to me, and extremely above board. In fact I actually make an effort to read the ad because I believe it is fair to both publisher and reader. There is no user identifiable registration or subscription involved, and no usernames or passwords to remember.

In the meantime, I'll try not to link to subscription sites, if I can find a non-subscription alternative for the same article. Or if it is truly subscription only, I'll try to post a warning on my article.