Quantcast FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: FiveThirtyEight to Partner with New York Times

6.03.2010

FiveThirtyEight to Partner with New York Times

Some exciting news this morning: We have reached agreement in principle to incorporate FiveThirtyEight's content into NYTimes.com.

In the near future, the blog will "re-launch" under a NYTimes.com domain. It will retain its own identity (akin to other Times blogs like DealBook), but will be organized under the News:Politics section. Once this occurs, content will no longer be posted at FiveThirtyEight.com on an ongoing basis, and the blog will re-direct to the new URL. In addition, I will be contributing content to the print edition of the New York Times, and to the Sunday Magazine. The partnership agreement, which is structured as a license, has a term of three years.

There are two particular reasons why we felt the Times was the best home for FiveThirtyEight. On the one hand, I very much see what we are doing as a type of journalism, in the sense that it consists of doing original research on a timely basis to help inform the public discourse. Thus, the Times' unflinching commitment to quality journalism makes for a natural fit, and I expect that the relationship will evolve in exciting ways as FiveThirtyEight is incorporated into a "traditional" newsroom setting. On the other hand, the terrific work of their graphic and interactive journalists was a major draw. The new blog should look and feel great, and should be substantially more robust and feature-rich than the simple, one-page design that we have now.

I'd like to thank my colleagues at FiveThirtyEight, and my attorney, Steve Sheppard, to say nothing of the countless friends and family members whose patience I tested as the discussions were ongoing. There are also a number of people to thank at the Times, first and foremost Jim Roberts, but also Gerald Marzorati, Bill Keller, Megan Liberman, and Brian Ernst, among others. This all happened somewhat serendipitously, growing out of a conversation that I had with Gerald when I ran into him on a Amtrak platform in Boston ten weeks ago.

Although we have not settled on an exact date, the partnership will most likely launch officially in about 9 or 10 weeks -- that is, in very early August. Until that time, I will be posting on a reduced schedule, as I focus on facilitating the transition and on bringing my book project substantially toward completion. Our other writers will continue to post as normal during this interim period.

266 comments

Shaun P said...

Congratulations, Nate!

Alex said...

mazel tov! Glad to see this blog getting the recognition it deserves.

Jacob said...

Congrats! That's great news.

Kevin said...

Not a fan- the Times is a polarizing name and you are known for focusing on the numbers despite your beliefs.

Still, I'm sure they gave you a good deal, and congratulations for creating a very successful and interesting blog so quickly.

Erik said...

I assume this is all designed to avoid the chaos of Puerto Rican statehood or something :P:P:P

I hope this is resulting in Scrooge-McDuck-like pools of money for the fine folks here.

Mark said...

Congrats from a long-time lurker!

Karl Shea said...

Congratulations! I've been following you since the 2008 primaries and it's great to see all your hard work being rewarded!

Chris said...

So in other words, 538.com is going behind a paywall starting in 2011 along with the rest of nytimes.com. Furthermore, effective as soon as you move over, no more usable RSS feed. Fuck all that. Sorry to hear this "good" news, Nate, despite the obvious professional advancement.

Dwight said...

There are two particular reasons why we felt the Times was the best home for FiveThirtyEight.

You left out reason three; Big bags of money! :)

Congrats. Although I'm left wondering if this will end my commenting here...

Wealthy Pete said...

Bravo Nate, you are the king of numbers that Karl Rove always wanted to be!

Sacto Joe said...

Well, Nate, it couldn't happen to a nicer, or more deserving, guy. You've impressed me repeatedly with your commitment to evenhandedness and objectivity. I'm pleased to see your star get lifted a bit higher.

Here's hoping that this is only the beginning for you!

R J said...

Nate, please confirm that the 538 content will not be subject to any subscription or other pay-for-content arrangement the New York Times currently has in place, or may envision enacting in the future.

While I love 538, if its content becomes hidden behind a pay-wall, I will sadly have to find other sources of information, as I cannot afford such a luxury. What can you tell us as to the continued free nature of the site post-transition?

Glenn Doty said...

Congradulations, though I too echo Kevin's concern that the partnership with the Times may result in watered-down content.

I also hope that access to the blog or the comments section within the blog isn't limited.

Nonetheless, you've built a truly respectable blog here, and deserve to be rewarded for it...
So congrats.

ambassoon said...

Congrats, Nate and others at fivethirtyeight! From a longtime reader, I wish you all success!

Seth said...

Does this mean that, like other NYT blogs, your RSS feed will now be an excerpt/summary feed, instead of a full feed? If so, I will be really, really disappointed, as that will mean I can't read your blog on my phone anymore without being connected to the Internet.

FiveThirtyEight has been my favorite blog for years, and I rely on its full RSS feed to read it. Please don't convert to a summary feed!

J. Verzak said...

I'm not a contributor here but am an avid reader. Congratulations on your success. It's well deserved.

mark said...

Congrats! However I share the concern expressed by Chris above about the NYT's useless RSS feeds. If you have any room to push for a feed that actually delivers content (instead of just headlines), that would be spectacular. Otherwise I doubt I'd read your work.

Daniel said...

First of all, congrats. Regardless of my opinions (which follow, and may just be the paranoid rantings of a madman), you guys deserve every ounce of recognition for all your work.

With that:

"I expect that the relationship will evolve in exciting ways as FiveThirtyEight is incorporated into a 'traditional' newsroom setting."

No, no, a thousand times now. This is my nightmare. "Incorporated into a traditional newsroom setting" is usually corp-speak for "temper your work to please higher-ups." 538 is the only political blog I can trust to stay neutral, intelligent, and still cuttingly direct.

Please don't fall into that trap. Don't change a thing about 538 and tell anyone who tries to meddle to take their money and get bent.

Kevin said...

Congrats! Get that money son!

Hunter L. Cook said...

Are the blogs at NYT going behind the paywall? That would kind of be a disaster.

If that's not the case and 538 will still be free, this is great news; congratulations.

A Conservatively Moderate Liberal said...

Yeah, I have to agree with some of the posters here, Nate.

Go behind a paywall, and your blog's traffic will plummet--

Austen said...

I'm very happy for you, (and I'ma let you finish), but honestly my first thought, like a number of posters above me, was about the 2011 NYT paywall. Obviously, your work deserves recognition and the pay raise is certainly overdue (and the people who think the NYT is "polarizing" or whatever are just morons, no other word for them), but, well, this is pretty clearly a net loss for me.

I'll keep following you through the midterms but after that I guess it will be farewell, which is too bad since this really is one of my favorite political blogs.

Klondike said...

Congratulations, Nate - I'm so happy that all the work you've done over the past two years has brought you something this tremendous. I'll remain a regular reader, wherever you go. Have a blast!

Alex S. said...

Congratulations!

So I guess you'll be the Chris Cillizza of the NYT. Well, I wish you the best of luck there. Just please don't start to use Beltway-speak, and keep your characteristics. I also hope that your blog won't disappear behind a paywall because I enjoy it immensely.

Jon said...

While I certainly commend your success, the fact that fivethirtyeight remains an independent blog is much the reason for its draw. The fact that it will incorporate into a mainstream website hinders the personalized feel of the current site and may stem the hardcore viewers to participate.

Mark Grebner said...

WOW!

As you're thinking about details, please try to port over all your previous posts, so they're available through the Times's search function. Whether you bring over all the old comments is less important, but it would be awfully sad if your old content was left behind on a derelict site.

There simply can't be any doubt that you've "made it". And unlike East Lansing's other recent prodigy (Larry Page) you still think of us as "home".

CONGRATS!

Harlan said...

Woo hoo, congratulations! And the very first thing I thought of when you said New York Times was "data visualization"! What a great collaboration.

And if you ever have to swing by the Grey Lady's glass-and-steel offices, I can recommend some falafel for lunch...

Mule Rider said...

There are two particular reasons why we felt the Times was the best home for FiveThirtyEight.

1. The NY Times is a far left journalistic outfit that is pushing a radical progressive agenda.

2. Fivethirtyeight.com is a far left journalistic outfit that is pushing a radical progressive agenda.

Sounds like a match made in heaven.

'Nuff said.

TIWolfman said...

Congratulations Nate, you deserve the payday. You've provided a largely fact/number based blog that gives a great amount of value for an extended time and despite a few unfounded posts by your intern 538 has been a greatly reliable resource for fact based political opinion.

That said, the NYT paywall will likely make you moot but more importantly the affiliation alone will force readers like myself to call into question the possibly purposeful bias, and even end goal purpose, articles may appear to have.

Daniel said...

Just adding a "+1" to both the congratulations as well as the immense distaste for a paywall.

RubyPanther said...

Great news for your pocket, terrible news for your readers.

This must be what they call "selling out." Thanks for not having a chance sooner, obviously.

Mule Rider said...

This will ultimately be where we part ways as I will have nothing to do with Nate's work once it moves to the NYT.

I know how that saddens Nate and his adoring fans :)

Here's wishing you all the misery, failure, humiliation, and irrelevance that you deserve.

DoctorMcLovin said...

That's great news -- FOR NATE SILVER! Go Nate go!

Skorgu said...

If the RSS feed switches to summary I will probably never click through. I'm sure the vastly larger audience will more than make up for it but I suspect many savvy users feel similarly.

TIWolfman said...

@Mark Grebner
"WOW!

As you're thinking about details, please try to port over all your previous posts, so they're available through the Times's search function. Whether you bring over all the old comments is less important, but it would be awfully sad if your old content was left behind on a derelict site.

There simply can't be any doubt that you've "made it". And unlike East Lansing's other recent prodigy (Larry Page) you still think of us as "home".

CONGRATS!"

First off, Larry Page was from Ann Arbor, he went to high school there, U of Michigan for his undergrad, and he's supported the area on many fronts including giving a graduation speech at his alma mater for the College of Engineering recently. He's never had anything to do with East Lansing. Second, I've read this blog daily for more than a year and a half and have never seen Nate give even word one props to anything Michigan...granted, by not piling on the disaster that is Detroit and the state government is cutting it a break the fact that most of the issues have been caused by ill-advised liberal policies from Detroit doesn't exactly make the topic goal furthering for Nate...

Midwestern Sensibilities said...

nate, congratulations. this is really terrific recognition of the product you've been putting out. not only am i happy for you, but i hope that all of your other regular readers will be, too. as difficult as this must be, however, please don't compromise your reputation for straight analysis now that the subject is "you." assuming that 538 is going to become like the times' other products (e.g., pay, not fully available over RSS), a good number of your current readers are going to be disappointed. you'll replace us with other readers and, you'll gain, i hope, a higher profile role in the national dialogue. but it may be that your gain is our loss and if would be great for you to address this directly.

Jane said...

Congratulations, Nate. Really good job of executing an "American Dream" type narrative for the 21st c - actual meritocracy, how bizarre. While this constant rapid transformation of the web/journalism gives me a constant feeling of nostalgia - still, it'll be great!

filistro said...

I for one hope there WILL be a firewall, and that certain people (you know who you are :-) will be forced to PAY THE NYT for the privilege of insulting this blog, its creatot and its regular contributors.

Oh, such sweet, sweet karma.

Of course all the conservatives will be strongly in favor of Nate's move... because they believe in the profit motive and wouldn't want creative people to be giving their stuff away for nothing... right?

Congrats, Nate. You've hit the big time, and you deserve it. Genuine talent is an unstoppable force, and the world makes way for it.

Plus, you're going to be invited to all the best parties now. Mazel tov! :-) :-) :-)

JamesY said...

Good Job Nate...as you deserve all the recognition that comes with this.

but I'll add to the distaste...

There are few places on the internet that I (and it seems a lot of us) feel they can find real information with limited bias (as nothing is truly without bias).

You have always been able to keep that bias very small - and it comes through with your work.


Now that you are indeed part of the 'journalist' machine - a machine that people have turned away from at increasing speed because of their lack of objectivity (and lack of a spine because of having to worry about cooperate interests)- will you have the freedom to stay the way you are? or are you now answering to a higher up?

Also - uuughh....as much as I think the whole news industry on the internet should have started off as a pay to read everything just like their paper counterpart - I will not be able to afford to buy reading time for your blog...sadly...

it was nice while it lasted.

Kevin said...

Nate,

Congratulations! You have one of most informative blogs on the internet, I'm glad you will be reaching a wider audience with it.

-Kevin Schultz

Michael said...

paywall = bad

also, paywall = can't read you anymore

I encourage all who agree to post comments to this effect!

JamesY said...

I'll take one of my points back.

if the blog stays as good as it is now, and I can find the money in my budget, I'll gladly pay to read this.

Jacob said...

A thousand mazel tovs, but I gotta agree that a paywall would be a disaster. I would guess that almost everyone here would stop reading this blog.

Though anything that sends Muley into radical rightwing hater mode is probably a good thing.

Mule Rider said...

The Rapid Decline of the New York Times

If all shareholders carried equal voting weight, the company would long ago have been a candidate for acquisition or breakup at the tender mercies of Wall Street fund managers. NYTCo has underperforming assets.


A failure like Nate Silver should be a very good fit at a failure like the New York Times.

As I said, a match made in heaven.

Piddlesworth said...

Man, I sincerely hope you negotiated for your own website/blog design separate from anything they have at NYT. Their current system is a disaster, with posts not being expandable in the list, no persistent side (projection tracker) graphics, no place for a tags list or a friends list or an extended archives list, and an absolutely worthless comment system... and don't act like you haven't gotten tons of worthwhile feedback through comments on your blog, because you have and now that will be impossible.

Seriously, just keep the website's current layout and move it to their servers if that's what they need, but don't let yourself become strangled by their content management system.

Jacob said...

What happened to the Mockus article?

Sam Strom said...

Congratulations Nate, keep up the great work. Now can you convince LeBron to go to the Bulls? Thanks!

JamesY said...

Hey Mule,

if Nate is such a failure, why do you even bother to read it anymore?

Valpey said...

Congratulations! It is always encouraging to see quality hard work get paid off.

I, for one, am happy to pay a fair price to access quality content such as yours.

Cheers!

Mule Rider said...

Though anything that sends Muley into radical rightwing hater mode is probably a good thing.

Gotta love it when an inferior scumbag likes you gets on his sanctimonious high horse.

You and the vast majority of commenters here are the perfect embodiment of the radical leftwing hater.

Uncommon Senz said...

Nate: Congrats on the achievement. Good to see your success. I too would hate to see a paywall, and I worry about a little editorial influence creeping in, but hey, you gotta do what you gotta do. And you made the big time.


@ MR: I know you get a charge out of riling people up, and you are only posting to do that and nothing more. It's totally juvenile, like a 4 year old who thinks saying "booger" is funny. But I guess you have every right to do that.

Here's what I honestly don't get. Nate provided a place for you to come and engage the "looney left". You chose to do that. And now you mock him for succeeding. I don't get it... why let you petty need to yell "booger" trump showing a little respect for someone who's product you used on a daily basis finally making it. Are you really that childish? And if so, maybe, for once, just let someone have their moment in the sun without pissing all over it?

Mule Rider said...

if Nate is such a failure, why do you even bother to read it anymore?

Precisely because he (and most of the rest of you) DON'T think he's a failure.

I'm just keeping all of your egos in check.

Pan said...

Yup, agreed. Definitely worth seeing Mule get into a lather and start spouting insults as he throws his temper tantrum. I forsee an appearance by his loveable Shots persona, who, of course, is a completely separate person. *wink wink*

Adam Calhoun said...

Like others said - happy for you etc etc. but:

1) Will we have to deal with the shitty one sentence summary in our RSS feed instead of the full thing? That's got to be the number one reason I never read NYT blogs.

2) Will you have to use their page design? Because it's kinda not so good for stuff like this.

3) Paywall? :(

Juris said...

Nate the Great! Great going!!!

Blissfully Ignorant said...

This is a major disappointment. Rarely do these partnerships work out for the junior partner. Look at the Baseball Prospectus / ESPN attempt.

I really, really hope you will reconsider.

As others have pointed out, NYTimes is one of the most polarizing name brands in the media industry.

JamesY said...

@Mule Rider
"if Nate is such a failure, why do you even bother to read it anymore?

Precisely because he (and most of the rest of you) DON'T think he's a failure.

I'm just keeping all of your egos in check."


really?

and how's that working out for you?


remember, you read this on a multiple times daily basis - and are contributing to its current success. So congrats on helping Nate launch into the big time!

talk about ironic!

Nick said...

"the Times' unflinching commitment to quality journalism"...hey, Nate, will you be getting Judith Miller's old desk, too?

Oh, well, all good things, as they say...but congratulations on the payday, you did earn it with your [soon to be formerly] good work.

Bart DePalma said...

Congrats Nate. This can only improve the level of horse race reporting at the NYT.

Dwight said...

LOL Mule Rider.

Linking to a nearly two year old article? So what are those profits looking like these days? Hrmmm, Q1 2010 is higher than the Q1 2007....

liberal_defender_of_freedom said...

Well deserved.

Dave said...

Sad =[

Read every post here since day 1, won't be the same, Congrats on your upgrade though.

Alex S. said...

Mule Rider is just a baby crying for his milk.

dr_funguy said...

@MuleRider
"1. The NY Times is a far left journalistic outfit that is pushing a radical progressive agenda.

2. Fivethirtyeight.com is a far left journalistic outfit that is pushing a radical progressive agenda."

Do you have any objective data for either of theses statements?

I'd love to see it.

Personally, I look at the NYT as typical corporate/government biased media. Remember Judith Miller and the WMDs in Iraq?
Remember the Clinton impeachment juggernaut? The NYT cannot be called leftist by any reasonable standard.

whatliberalmedia.com

Mule Rider said...

And if so, maybe, for once, just let someone have their moment in the sun without pissing all over it?

For all of the hate, bile, vitriol, invective, insults, threats, etc. that has been directed at people like myself over the past couple of years and this site being a forum to display all of that filth, I have no remorse whatsoever stepping in and pissing in you guys' corn flakes when I feel like you're doing a little too much self-congratulating and navel-gazing.

Henry said...

PERFECT MATCH!

Congrats Nate!

jeffelavar said...

Congrats, Nate. NYT needs you. Hope to bump into you in Brooklyn one of these days.

WarningTrack said...

Good for Nate. I may even consider paying for access if the price is reasonable enough, and the quality high enough. And, of course, if the blog sticks to statistical analysis and doesn't veer off into editorializing as often as it does now.

And if a paywall restricts access and the comment threads improve in civility and insight as a result, all the better.

Best of luck.

shiloh said...

Is this the same NYT who were asleep at the wheel when cheney/bush decided to attack Iraq unprovoked!

just wonderin'

but, but, but NYT can help aspiring writers hit the big time, eh.

Sarcasm aside, congrats Nate, but like cable news media, most of whom want to be celebrities and sell their damn books instead of, you know, actually reporting factual news, one has to wonder who are the remaining independent, competent, intelligent watchdogs of the American govt.

>

oh and the obvious, as others have mentioned, if this becomes a pay-site, it's 100% dead!

take care

Mule Rider said...

Linking to a nearly two year old article? So what are those profits looking like these days? Hrmmm, Q1 2010 is higher than the Q1 2007....

You seriously want to try and make the case that the NYT is trending towards relevance and prosperity?

I've always known you to be an inferior clown (read: dumb shit), but surely you aren't even a big enough moron to argue that?

PeteKent said...

Congratulations, Nate. You have clearly reached the pinnacle of Left Wing (ahem!) Journalism. I mean that sincerely.

In today's media age, a Point of View is inescapable and you have found yourself and your colleagues a fantastic host for your broad and varied talents, most particularly your statistical analytical ones where I marvel at your ability to decouple and re-associate data and reveal truth where before there was only noise/static.

Quite honestly, your able abilities will hopefully be supplemented by the strong editing team at the Times which will help not only with the typos (the human nature of which I will miss), but better telegraphing of your point to those of us (like me) who sometimes get lost in masses of quantitative data and appreciate a bit more narration and conclusion assertion/drawing.

Here at 538 I am often a much-derided figure, shunned and routinely asked to leave. Despite the ill-temper of so many of your guests, I have found this to be a fascinating forum, an excellent place to study the mindset of the opposition (in the comments) and from which I have learned a great deal. Throwing bowling balls down the alley often upsets pins.

Also, I might have gone elsewhere but for the very easy way Nate and his team have made it to comment and how well the comments are displayed. Navigation is so easy.

I also appreciate that despite my own most intemperate remarks (my poor sense of irony?) and those of others on all sides of the political spectrum, you managed (with short experiments here and there) to maintain this site without moderation and, as such, harkens back to Public Square of Old, and for that, sir, you are a Patriot! I hate the comments section at the NYTs bc it is moderated and not in real time. Even if you get posted, you can’t have the crisp crackle of back and forth debate, or failing it, insult!

I have heard that the NYTs is going to start charging for its on line content. I don't know if that will cover 538s blog. I do not believe in paying for internet content. There is simply no need there are so many aggregators out there and so much content that it rarely makes sense.

I hope, Nate, you do not retreat behind an imprisoning corporate wall, and that you and yours continue to flourish in your own idiosyncratic way, and I wish you Godspeed on your life's journey, wherever it may take you.

Lucky man: You always have Baseball to fall back on!

petekent01 (on twitter)

Mule Rider said...

Linking to a nearly two year old article? So what are those profits looking like these days? Hrmmm, Q1 2010 is higher than the Q1 2007....

The NYT was steadily turning to shit in the decades prior to 2007/2008, so I wouldn't make too much of a brief abating or slight reversal of the trend over a 2-year period.

The longer-term trend is still in place. It's a has-been and is destined for collapse.

somasoda14 said...

Holy crap! I might have just regained some faith in the NYT after reading all those Noam Chomsky books!

Congratulations, Nate, Tom, et al. You guys deliver solid, sober analysis day in and day out, and it's about time the mainstream media gave more power and influence to people like you.

Uncommon Senz said...

@ MR: You get bile directed at you because all you ever do is throw it at others.

But let's pretend you actually meant what you just wrote. There is no "self congratulating" here. It is congratulating Nate on HIS achievement. He created this, it matured, all of us (INCLUDING YOU)use the product, and he just made the big time.

But you just can't take off your ideological blinders for a second. You use the product everyday, and then dump on the product. You use the product everyday and dump on its success. You use the product everyday and dump on the users of the product (which includes you). You use the product everyday and trash its creator.


Like I said, I get the only reason you post the crap you do is to get a rile out of people. Everyone has their own baggage to carry and that is yours. But even someone doing that should be adult enough to either acknowledge the success Nate achieved, or at least put aside your desire to rile people up for just one post.

Nat reached a milestone- why not just skip your petulant "look at me" postings for once, and let him have his moment. Is that too much to ask from a daily consumer of his product?

Strangeite said...

Sorry Nate, but you are going to have to turn the Grey Lady down.

You see, being an irrational University of Kentucky fan, the NYT's recent expose on Eric Bledsoe has left me no choice but to boycott the NYT, despite the fact that I have a school girl crush on the paper.

I am sure that it was simply on oversight on your part in failing to ask my opinion on this possible merger.

Sorry you had to waste all of that time and money on a business deal that obviously can't happen now.

The truth and journalistic integrity are wonderful things, but unwavering loyalty to the Big Blue Nation trumps all.

Jacob said...

@US

Well said. Even Bart and Pete managed to tone down the posturing/vitriol to say congratulations. There is something seriously wrong with Muley.

Gatordad said...

@ PeteKent

That was nicely said and gracious Pete.

@ Nate

Congrats

rodii said...

@TIWolfman: Larry Page was born in East Lansing, grew up in East Lansing (or Okemos?), and graduated from East Lansing High School. Get your facts straight.

Nate has mentioned his Michigan roots several times here, but you're right, it hasn't really been a big theme of his.

shiloh said...

And too funny how even a thread about Nate has become Mule infested.

OK, Mule did threaten to kill Nate lol

If this becomes a pay site, hopefully Mule will join and continue to drive the few other fools who pay money to join crazy as once again Mule controls the narrative and people take the bait!

So, in the final analysis, Mule wins!

just sayin'

parksie555 said...

Congrats Nate, hopefully they will let you do the occasional guest appearance in the sports section.

icebergslim said...

Congrats, Nate. I remember when you were poblano on DKOS. You were insightful then and continue to be. I will definitely follow you @ NYT.

mdf356 said...

I'm not entirely pleased with this. One of the things I enjoy about the 538.com blog is the comments after the posts; there's some great back-and-forth between various regulars. The nytimes.com blog comments are screened and so take quite a while to appear, and the comment forums only show 25 to a page. This is all much more annoying than the current format.

Yehuda said...

Congratulations Nate. Love the blog and hope the analysis is as frequent as it has been for the last two years. I also hope you don't shy away from making bold predictions b/c of the increased scrutiny of the Times.

Pan said...

I think the thing that really bothers Mule (and his pen name Shots) is that if he posts the same kind of threats of physical assault on an NYT site, someone might bother to actually sue him. And they'd likely win, as other cases have. At the least, Muley would be become an unmasked righty as his identity would be published as part of the court record.

I'm sure that spells an end to his unchecked vitriol when the site moves over. If not, it will be fun to see the result.

shiloh said...

On the upside, NYT should solve 538's ad nauseam spam problem ...

JamesY said...

so true shiloh, so true.

and he has yet to come back about my comment on how he has helped the success of this site by commenting multiple times a day.

Jacob said...

as once again Mule controls the narrative and people take the bait! So, in the final analysis, Mule wins!


Not entirely. Some of us just like arguing (especially with those who so embody the loud shrill obtuseness of the modern right).

EJP said...

Congrats on your personal success.

Completely sucks for us readers who are about to be denied usable RSS feeds though.

zegota said...

Congrats on the job prospect. Sucks I won't be able to read you anymore, given that there's no way in hell I'm going to pay for the NYT once they put everything behind a paywall.

TheWgp said...

Don't water or temper your commentary to please higher-ups or the legal department... you're giving up some of your soul in exchange for that money, and *you know it* all pleasantries and PR fluff aside. An example: You can't do things like out-and-out go after Strategic Vision if lawyers and editors are yanking your chain. Especially when you're behind such a polarizing name as the NYT - it's sadly unquestionable that 538's credibility goes DOWN as a result of this, in the public eye. Your perceived neutrality is your greatest asset - and now you've sold that out, at least in spirit.

I also sadly have to agree that if this goes behind a paywall, I will no longer be reading. All in all, it seems like this confluence of factors means that I'll be searching for a replacement site for the 2012 election cycle.

Perhaps one or more of the other posters will split off - a couple of them are close to Nate's skill level, to say the least. Nate got 538 started and showed this is possible - so I'm sure someone else will take up the same idea.

shiloh said...

As others have mentioned, all NYT's posts are moderated, soooo in theory, many of Mule's posts won't see the light of day.

>

Back in the day I joined the NYT and Washington Post sites just to have access to their articles others had linked to. Of course, they were not pay sites at the time.

also back in the day, the theory was the internet would be totally free because of advertising revenue ...

Well, all that has changed, eh as the bottom line, as always, has become the bottom line!

mchen said...

Congratulations! I haven't exactly followed NYTimes.com's recent explorations of charging subscribers, though. I hope your work will remain available to non-subscribers! Will we still be able to find all of FiveThiryEight's stuff in one place?

Also, just as a side note, I believe "The" is officially part of the name of The New York Times. Thus, it should be capitalized, and the right shortening of the name is The Times. Might be important if you're writing for them :P

x0lani said...

That's awesome!!!

Congratulations, fellas! And especially you, Nate.

Dwight said...

Jacob said...

Not entirely. Some of us just like arguing (especially with those who so embody the loud shrill obtuseness of the modern right).


Me, I figured a few more kicks on his pathetic, bitter, whiny ass on it's way out the door were in order.**

Sure it's sort of piling on, today is just another in the string of disappointments for his dream of Nate "getting what is coming to him". :)

Really it's a double whammy for Mulie, given his well apparent hatred for the NYT. This is a good pickup for the NYT to continue a transition from newsprint.

** Do I don't actually believe he is leaving. Nate's the drug he just can't quit, his addiction to hatin' won't let him.

Dwight said...

@mchen

Speaking of which, I wonder if Nate'll finally be able to afford someone to check his grammar and spelling. ;)

Armchair Editorialist said...

While I guess if it's what you wanted, I'm happy for you, but personally I really don't like this.
The Times is pretty polarizing, and frankly they're not all they're cracked up to be. The pay wall is pretty ridiculous, and having to put your work through the filter of the liberal-leaning Times would probably diminish your fairly unbiased stance on many issues. BTW, did you consider Politico? They're all-online and a much friendlier place towards different viewpoints than the NYT.
Oh, and everyone, just ignore Mule Rider. Don't feed the trolls. He'll go away when nobody listens to him.

Above my Paygrade said...

Congrats Nate, not on the NYTimes thing, something more important. On the Top Ten section of PBS's central michigan Quiz Bowl competition, in the category of Most influential people of 2008, the question was, "Who was a former baseball statistician and journalist, who turned into a political blogger, commentator, and analyst, correctly predicting election outcomes, and creating and contributing regularly to the site FiveTHirtyEight.com, while also making frequent appearances on Cable News Programs commenting on the 2008 presidential election." Some kid buzzed in at that point and I believe said Dick Morris. I didn't know Dick was into Baseball. The rest of the clue was something about being voted one of the top 100 influential people in politics for 2008 by some foundation or other. Congrats on the NYTimes thing also. but when you hit CMU quizbowl you have hit the big time.

Goliath said...

Congratulations! But, like others have mentioned... Paywall? And is there any way at all you can keep a full-text RSS feed? It seems as though I just gradually stop reading things that are excerpt-only.

soonerhq said...

Congrats Nate, from a faithful reader since the poblano days at DKos. I too am worried about the paywall and the truncated RSS feed, not to mention possible editorial interference with your unique perspective and persona.

Pity you didn't go the FootballOutsiders.com route. They partnered with ESPN.com for a portion of their work, which now appears as premium content on ESPN. But they still publish free content on their website as well. Best of both worlds, if you ask me.

Monotreme said...

Congratulations, Nate. I'm happy for you.

Dale said...

Congrats.

BUT "Times' unflinching commitment to quality journalism"??? Given its recent history, I wouldn't use "unflinching" or "quality."

Michael McDaniel said...

Not looking forward to losing 583 -- I've enjoyed it from the beginning. If it's not in my newsreader, it doesn't exist, though. So long, Nate. Paywall + no RSS is going to significantly impact your readership. You'll get new ones, though.

Best of luck!

Art said...

If the NYTimes *is* planning on bringing 538 behind a paywall, that's a smart move on their part. I probably won't pay for 538 behind a paywall, it depends on how much it costs, how busy I am, and how much of it is Nate, but I might. I certainly wouldn't pay for the Times on its own though. AP journalists too often strive for the appearance of objectivity by avoiding hard questions, and I hate the whole AP format. 538 is an antidote to that, and bringing him in may be the smartest move management has made in the last few years.

enterpriser said...

damn...how many bad things are going to happen in the last 2 days!

armando galarraga gets cheated out of a perfect game and the f**** commissioner refuses to overturn the call.

ken griffey jr. turns into a lazy bum and retires.

and now this bs.


I am sooo TIRED of these partnering deals.

All that does is create less and less content.

For example, the BP/ESPN deal means that now we do not have 3 good sources of analysis, but only 2.

So now, if NYT is really a good news source, you go from 3 good news sources to 2 as well.


Also, will the lovely design of the website be lost in the transition?

I simply adore the site layout, colors, format, etc. and would be devastated if it was changed.


Also, way to royally lie to us over the past 2 weeks, claiming that you were not posting much, because you had brand new Senate, House, and governor's analaysis and models to give us, when in reality, you only care about your partnership deal and your book.


Greedy, fu****ing, lying bastard.

Henry said...

I just went to Dealbook and it is not behind a paywall.

In the words of the late Gary Coleman - "What you talkin' about Willis!"

Phil said...

I have to say, while I'm happy for you personally as I'm sure this represents an improvement in your quality of life and reputation, my first thought is, "bummer." This diminishes your independence and limits your access to me, for many of the reasons cited above. (The shortened RSS feed policy, moderated comments -- it's more the latency than the moderation that I mind -- and the eventual paywall that has shut me off from FT as well. Though the paywall is the less of a concern than the lack of independence; if you had gone to a BP-style paywall right here, I might well have paid, as I have in the past at BP.)

I hope I'm an outlier, and that the net impact of this move is truly to bring your type of insight to a larger audience. Most of the people with my concerns will find ways to keep informed, after all.

Tanystropheus said...

I'm really looking forward to better proofreading, fewer trolls in the comments, and the positive influence that this blog will have on the Times. (Why does everyone automatically assume it will go the other way?) However, if the Times doesn't upgrade their comments system, the troll reduction benefit will be canceled out.

I'm not worried about editorial interference, because from what I've seen, the Times blogs are actually quite independent -- at least those of them whose writers have independent minds. (For example, some of the things Timothy Egan wrote about the Amanda Knox case make you wonder if he was actually angling for a lawsuit from an Italian prosecutor.)

I'm not thrilled about the paywall, but I absolutely would pay for access to this blog. It's worth the money.

PoliticalWiz said...

Congratulations on the payday, Nate.

The move WILL suck.

The freeflow, like 'em or not, of comments will stop.

The points Art just made sum it up.

Maybe you should have gotten a "status quo" for the site as part of the deal, for the three years.

We'll see.

AWoldie said...

Ok folks - first, Congratulations, Nate - your even handed objective analysis deserves to be seen by the many more people who will do that now. And every person who will question the pablum fed by Fauxentertainment media is a good thing for our country.

Second - we've all been privileged to have your analysis for years for free. It's not unreasonable for you to be compensated for such terrific work - as the rest of us are for our jobs. So if we all have to suck it up and pay, so be it. News - good news, objective news, news that makes us question and challenge our assumptions is like freedom - it just ain't free! And I say that as someone who's been unemployed for over a year!

shiloh said...

Alas, the mid-terms won't be as much fun! ;)

All those 538 winger tsunami predictions are moot as corporate America is now Nate's stomping ground ...

>

but, but, but oh the irony of the very few conservative, disingenuous/misinformation trolls who do follow Nate to The Times and have to post at a liberal newspaper lol.

enterpriser said...

"Ok folks - first, Congratulations, Nate - your even handed objective analysis deserves to be seen by the many more people who will do that now. And every person who will question the pablum fed by Fauxentertainment media is a good thing for our country.

Second - we've all been privileged to have your analysis for years for free. It's not unreasonable for you to be compensated for such terrific work - as the rest of us are for our jobs. So if we all have to suck it up and pay, so be it. News - good news, objective news, news that makes us question and challenge our assumptions is like freedom - it just ain't free! And I say that as someone who's been unemployed for over a year!"


That makes no freaking sense though because the "casual" audience is the one who needs to be informed, but there is no way that they would ever pay for content?

Walker said...

Congrats, Nate. Thanks for the past year or so of quality commentary and number crunching.

While this is undoutedly good for you professionally I fear that in the long run partnering with the New York Times will hurt the "brand" that is 538.com.

Being truly independent, fluid, and flexible, beholden to no one, is a good thing.

Readers of 538.com, feel free to come over to my new political blog, 539.com in about a week. Same look and feel as 538 but with sutble changes: a masculine gun-metal gray instead of the red and white motif. Also, the political bias will be more pronounced towards the right. I have already lined up a searing series of articles by Pete Kent entitled "FauxBama: Political Authentity in the Age of Obama". Also look for regular contributions from Ted Nuggent, some of them composed in haiku-format. The Motor City Madman's lyricism is surprising.

Oh, and the analytics on 539.com will totally suck compared to what you are used to. That's to be expected.

Maybe in a few years I too can sell 539 to the Journal...

Patrick said...

Just wanted to say "thanks" to Nate and the other writers, and I'll really miss reading this useful and entertaining analysis every day. It's been a great site, but I guess all good things must come to an end!

Mule Rider said...

This is where Nate's ego got the best of him....something fueled by all of you radical loons.

He actually thought the product he was putting out was awesome enough he could slap a big NYT sticker on it and sell it for more money than he was making.

Boy is he in for a rude surprise when he finds out nobody really gives a shit.

This is going to be one epic fail. And I'll be cheering the entire time.

wv: ingey - the feeling or urge that you should be playing 3rd base for the Detroit Tigers

Tim said...

I'm happy for you, but my readership of the Freakonomics blog fell off once they joined NY Times because the Times won't allow full-text RSS feeds. I expect the same to happen with your work.

Why do you penalize your most avid readers?

Mule Rider said...

And I say that as someone who's been unemployed for over a year!

Another dumb, lazy liberal shit-for-brains.

enterpriser said...

And just for this atrocity, I am boycotting Nate's book.

Maybe I will check it out of a library one day, which I really hate doing, because I think it is not fair to the developers, publishers, authors, etc. for me to get their content for free, but this scum of the earth deserves it.

Mule Rider said...

@Jacob & Dwight,

I will miss embarrassing you two dumbasses, that's for sure.

Bobby said...

I used to work in sports entertainment (pro-wrestling). And there's aways a little worry about someone when they get pulled up to.the big leagues. But as someone who knows what it's like to work for little return. Everyone deserves a pay day for their hard work. Mozel tov Nate. Enyoy your payday and I hope it is long, successful and profitable for you and your bloggers. I'll be following one way or another.

Joshunodos said...

First, congrats.

I haven't missed many posts since early 2008.

Please keep the full feed. NYTimes feeds are not very good. If they feel that they want ads then add them to a full feed not force us to go to the site. I subscribe to some of their feeds and I always avoid reading them because it is a hassle. This usually just means that they build up an unread count until I decide to mark them as read(even though I didn't.)

I will start missing posts if you switch to their rss system.

Thanks,
Josh

Hunter L. Cook said...

Henry,

Dealbook isn't behind the paywall because the paywall isn't up yet. Our concerns are about what will happen to 538 after January 2011 when it starts.

I've got to be honest here; I read this site daily and comment frequently...but I've never paid just to read a blog, and I really doubt I'm going to start next year.

enterpriser said...

I would have preferred to see Nate sign on with foxnews, as opposed to the NYT.

x0lani said...

Wow, until reading these comments I never realized that the NYT was considered so polarizing and divisive.

I'd agree that they're probably center-left, but really, people...

And, for the record, all print media newspapers are struggling with how to deal with the free-for-all that is the internet.

The NYT supports RSS feeds nicely - I wouldn't expect that to change. Most of the blogs are free to read, so that shouldn't be a problem either.

John B. said...

Congratulations, and you certainly deserve it for all of the hard work and premium content that you've posted, but I want to add to the chorus of people saying "please oh please don't go behind a paywall".

I almost *never* check the Times, yet I check this site multiple times per day. Your content is impartial, informative, and most importantly *backed up by analysis*, the kind of which we almost never see in the media nowadays (including the Times).

Anyway, I sincerely hope that you won't go behind a paywall with the NYT puts one up. The internet and political awareness of many, many people will suffer if you do.

Uncommon Senz said...

Thought for a second MR had actually read what I wrote and decided to act like an adult. Clearly I was wrong. I apologize for trying to reason with a troll and I will ignore his childlike "mommy look at me, I am so funny" posts.

I had thought that since may actually read the comments on this particular post, it would be nice if they were free of the typical "you are such a dumbass" nonsense, but that is apparently asking too much.


Anyway- congrats Nate. I share many of the same concerns as others posting here, but regardless of it works out the way I would personally like for me, i hope it brings you great success. Journalism today has lost the ability to objectively look at numbers and see if they prove or disprove conventional wisdom. That is a valuable service, and I think critical to those of us (from both sides) who would rather understand an issue than rely on talking points.


And I have to add, 538 was a source of sanity for me during the 2008 election, as it helped me figure out what was real and what was noise. So thanks for that.

Good luck!

Barb said...

Oh, Nate! How could you?

Now that your paycheck comes from The Times, I'll never be completely certain that I can take you at face value. "...the Times' unflinching commitment to quality journalism"? Dead years ago. And no RSS means I have no realistic way of reading. I've followed you, quietly, since the beginning. It's been fun. I was looking forward to the upcoming election season, but no longer.

Josh said...
This post has been removed by the author.
Josh said...

I'm looking forward to an update on the 538 Senate #s...

This is overly optimistic I'm sure: Senate Prospects for Democrats Looking Up.

But I do think the general idea is right on. The Republicans are snatching defeat from the jaws of victory with their lunatic fringe candidates.

JF Isher said...

My own personal blog nobody knew about is now going to be the world's! No! It's all mine!

Congrats!

Hunter L. Cook said...

AWOldie,

Second - we've all been privileged to have your analysis for years for free. It's not unreasonable for you to be compensated for such terrific work - as the rest of us are for our jobs.

Are you under the impression that Nate has been living in the poorhouse while he runs 538 as some sort of charity? I don't know what he's been making, and I certainly don't begrudge him a bit more...but let's be serious here, it certainly appears that this has already been quite a successful venture for him.

wannascribble said...

Congrats Nate, you deserve your success.

I do hope you and your team are able to maintain the independence we've grown accustomed to. I'd hate to see your work get watered down by outside influences.

But on the whole this is a good thing and it's great to see such quality work be rewarded!

x0lani said...

There's a list of NYT RSS feeds right here!

Is it really a big deal that their abridged? They just want people to come to the main page so they can track readership.

PoliticalWiz said...

Just remember what happened to David Caruso when he left to become a "moviestar"

Babar said...

Congrats Nate from a long time reader even if I seldom comment. This is a very exciting development, you deserve the payday, and the public deserves your analysis.

You are right to think if yourself as a journalist, because you are the closest example of what I think a journalist should be. We need smart people like you in the MSM, and not some of the pretty faces and charades we typically get.

This is very very good news.

Pat said...

Good news for Nate.

Bad news for a "Non-Partisan" numerical analysis.

It'll be interesting to see if this affects Nate's handling of NYTimes polls, and how he ranks them.

I'm guessing, not immediately. But after 3 years?

JamesY said...

@Mule
"This is where Nate's ego got the best of him....something fueled by all of you radical loons.

He actually thought the product he was putting out was awesome enough he could slap a big NYT sticker on it and sell it for more money than he was making."

I'll say this again for the third time:

He has YOU to thank also for his success. one of the things looked at for the success of a blog is the amount of visitors and comments. You comment MANY times a day. you helped his success.

Feel good about it? I love the irony..


enjoy the rest of your day, knowing you are one of the people that helped propel Nate Silver into the successful blogger that he is considered today.

Kurt said...

As someone who started following you at BP and then migrated over here (as a lurker) during the primaries in 2008 I congratulate you!

If this causes people to have to pay for your work now, who cares about them? They've been given years of valuable content for free. Quality work deserves to be compensated for (and by more than banner ad revenue).

And really, online subscriptions are generally pretty cheap. Just have one less Starbucks each month.

Bradley said...

Congrats, Nate!! You definitely deserve it. Just don't let them change the site too much

Scott said...

Those whining about the paywall are acting like a bunch of entitled brats. Advertising isn't going to make the world go 'round forever, for all content generators. If you want any kind of quality journalism in the future, people will have to pay the journalists to do it.

EmilyRSVP said...

One quick question

You mentioned that the URL will redirect. What about the archives? Will users will be able to read from the archives?

shiloh said...

enterpriser said...

I would have preferred to see Nate sign on with foxnews, as opposed to the NYT.
~~~~~~~~~~


Indeed, 538 conservatives will now be paying $ to keep the NYT's afloat. Oh the humanity!

Eventually, just like printed media is evaporating, internet news media will disappear also.

Cable TV has the news covered 24/7 w/their own useless, ad nauseam tools: Cooper, Tweety, Billo etc.

and Nate will become one of these mainstream tv pundits, sooo he will have something in common w/palin lol

Rudy said...

Congratulations are definitely in order for such a prestigious relationship. I can only hope that Nate retains devotion to intellectually honest analysis, chips fall where they may, recalibrating when he goes astray.

The pressure could become more intense to manipulate data to preordained opinion, to which Nate is already periodically vulnerable, but his internal gyroscope usually rights itself.

Regardless, this move should draw more readership and appreciation for the art of numbers.

DCM in FL said...

que sera, sera...

soon we will all be movin' on to the next 'new' best thing out there that is a work in progress...

was nice while it lasted tho...

congrats on the assumedly big payday

but I was lookin' forward to more behind the scenes articles from our old buddy, Sean when the 2012 cycle rolled around

maybe Nate shoulda teamed up with Apple or Google instead ??? [or even MS]

instead he has decided to become another well-paid DH [designated hitter] for the New York Yankees [er Times]

instead of remaining as the veteran All-Star utility player/pinch-hitter for our beloved small market home team...

Nate will need a new nickname now in NYC [as Poblano will no longer do]... N-Sil perhaps ???

MN said...

Heh, well forget honest polling analysis about Israel.

Also, if you give something away for free and then you try to charge for it when it goes behind the paywall, you deserve what ever you get.

You'll always be the "shut up until the experts tell you what to think" guy just like BP is to this day.

archer said...

Nate...Nate...why?

The tears are blinding me.

DCM in FL said...

PWhiz

Caruso ??? ok, but in my mind the better warning would be... look what happened to Philip Michael Thomas after Miami Vice

[what did happen anyway with all those awards PMT was gonna win...]

The artist formerly known as Matt said...

@PoliticalWiz:

Just remember what happened to David Caruso when he left to become a "moviestar"

There is a difference between Nate and David Caruso:
Nate doesn't suck.

Congrats, Nate. I too hope you won't be stuck behind a paywall. Butt I congratulate you on your clearly greatly recognized success, and I look forward to more trenchant analysis from you in the future.

Aside to Walker: I've already got 539.com bookmarked!

Hayford Peirce said...

All right, folks, bite the bullet and, like me, subscribe to the print edition of the NYT. That way not only will you have something to read every day, plus have something to help you start fires in your fireplaces during the winter, you will also be able to read Nate online for free, I'm sure....

Goliath said...

"x0lani said...

There's a list of NYT RSS feeds right here!

Is it really a big deal that their abridged?"

It is when you're subscribed to 80-100 feeds, and when every additional "click to read more" opens a new tab, and then all of a sudden you have 30 tabs open in firefox and no idea where to begin. It's an issue of workflow.

Obliterati said...

Our little baby's all growed up! Congrats to Nate, and all the 538 team.

I'm sure there will be some bumps in the road, but hey...it's been a winding and bumpy road since the Poblano/Dkos days, and I'd say things have worked out pretty well so far. Onward and upward!

shiloh said...

Hayford Peirce said...

All right, folks, bite the bullet
~~~~~~~~~~


Nate has every right in the world to make a buck, just like palin ;) but I pay for internet service and that's it. ~ personal preference.

once paid for access to a newsgroup until I found out eMule and other download sites, torrent sites, and other blog sites provide the same service for free.

Why pay for Showtime and HBO when you can download a torrent right after the show has aired, and sometimes before the show has aired on cable.

To each his own ...

Jacob said...

@MN

How many articles has Nate written about Israel since this site began? And one would be hard-pressed to call Renard Sexton a radical Likud-apologist. I would highly doubt that the Times would lean on anyone here to soft-pedal the already minimal and blase articles about Israel.

And since when is respecting the opinions of experts a bad thing?

Stan said...

I agree with most of the previous comments, both pro and con:

Nate has run a superb website, directed to intelligent people.

Nate deserves the additional money and exposure that he'll get from this move.

Nate deserves our sincere congratulations.

Joining a large, long-established institution such as the New York Times will ALWAYS have an inhibiting effect on a person's willingness and ability to speak openly and objectively. There are no exceptions, and never have been, anywhere, any time.

I will not be willing to pay for access to the new blog under the NYT umbrella.

The New York Times pursues as mainstream liberal agenda in its choices of how much space it devotes to various stories, and where to place them. So does Nate, but he is more conscious of the need for evenhandedness than his new masters at the NYT. So I expect a moderate but noticeable shift to greater emphasis on issues which appeal to liberals, and correspondingly less emphasis on issues which put the conservative or libertarian position in a favorable light.

In sum: good for Nate (deservedly), probably bad for us and for the country.

Mule Rider said...

enjoy the rest of your day, knowing you are one of the people that helped propel Nate Silver into the successful blogger that he is considered today.

Flaming threads and calling out radical leftists as the punk-ass bitches that they are hardly contributed to any of the "success" that Nate might be enjoying.

And, seriously, if it's people like me and my rantings on this site over the last couple of years that helped vault him over the top and into "stardom" at the NYT, then he really is doomed to fail. I can't think of a more hollow base of support.

Mark my words: this kid's life is going to wind up in ruins...even if it takes me working alone from now 'til doomsday to do it.

Mule Rider said...

In sum: good for Nate (deservedly), probably bad for us and for the country.

Yeah, that's a spot on summary:

ANYTHING good for Nate Silver is probably bad for the country.

Pan said...

#153: Mule Rider said...

Flaming threads and calling out radical leftists as the punk-ass bitches that they are hardly contributed to any of the "success" that Nate might be enjoying.


Are you really that ignorant of how blogs make money?

Chad said...

This is good news for Bush! Or McCain!

Please instruct your new overlords to keep the javascript that allows you to expand a post without having to go to a new page.

Its the best, I wish every blog would do that.

Thanks,

cfkdaddy@gmail.com

enterpriser said...

"Joining a large, long-established institution such as the New York Times will ALWAYS have an inhibiting effect on a person's willingness and ability to speak openly and objectively. "


WTF does this mean?

Who the hell would really censor their opinions to please their boss?

Jacob said...

Muley said...

Flaming threads and calling out radical leftists as the punk-ass bitches that they are hardly contributed to any of the "success" that Nate might be enjoying.


No, but you do provide a service to this site. Ordinary progressives and moderates seething at the hateful propaganda of the right can find angry disingenuous righties hee to argue with, who are relatively easy to take down.

It's a sort of cathartic experience.

Mule Rider said...

Are you really that ignorant of how blogs make money?

And are you so ignorant as to think that joining a failing, leftist propaganda-spewing "news" machine like the NYT will ultimately be successful for Nate? He and that worthless piece of shit newspaper are doomed to fail, and I'm loving every minute of it.

But to your question, I drove away far more traffic by making the comment section unbearable for "civil" readers than I created with people willing to engage me with dialogue. Can you deny this? You've seen the people leave disgusted and never come back and cite me as reason numero uno that they couldn't stand joining the comment thread. Anyway, net-net, I can guarantee you that I hurt the readership at 538.com.

But overall, my impact - as well as everyone else's at the individual level - is practically negligible.


Who the hell would really censor their opinions to please their boss?

Seriously, you're not that big of an ignoramus, are you?

DCM in FL said...

NATE

please do a SEN update this week ???

lots of new polling developments - and most seem to favor the DEMS maintaining a comfortable majority

CT - even Ras admits that Blumenthal is still way on top

KY - again, polls including Ras show a horserace

MO - even Ras showing a toss-up

NV - new polls showing that Reid could actually win re-election against any of the GOP

CA - looks like Boxer is gonna get the weaker general election candidate [Campbell had a much better chance than Carly ever will]

hhhmmmm...that massive rising red tide seems to be seriously ebbing already - with 5 months to go, the shoals are showin'

waiting for the May jobs report to be 'officially' released...

wv - billa [paywall]

Joe said...

All the cry-babies in this comments section make me laugh. Nate, congrats to you and the 538 team. I think it's a great move and it will enable many more people to benefit from your insights.

Mule Rider said...

No, but you do provide a service to this site.

Yeah, meeting the hateful, vitriolic, and unhinged left on their own stomping grounds and giving them some of their own soundbites.

Ordinary progressives and moderates seething at the hateful propaganda of the right can find angry disingenuous righties hee to argue with

And this site gave an ordinary conservative and independent like myself who is constantly seething at the hateful propaganda of the left a chance to argue with angry, disingenuous liberals.

who are relatively easy to take down.

Hah! Best laugh I've had all day. Not one dumb ass piece of shit liberal - you or anyone else - has every "taken me down."

I defy you morons and will keep on doing so, even if I don't follow you to your new den at the NYT.

I hope you all become one big miserable bunch together in your increasingly soundproof echo chamber.

enterpriser said...

"Who the hell would really censor their opinions to please their boss?

Seriously, you're not that big of an ignoramus, are you?"


What do you mean? You could try answering me, instead of just calling me a name?

Mule Rider said...

What do you mean? You could try answering me, instead of just calling me a name?

I mean that it's pretty much standard operating procedure for most people to censor their opinions to please their boss.

I can't believe you've lived such a sheltered life to disagree with that statement.

DCM in FL said...

from NYTimes.com

@ http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/03/the-new-york-times-to-host-political-polling-site-fivethirtyeight/?scp=1&sq=fiveThirtyEight.com&st=cse

Media Decoder

June 3, 2010, 10:44 am

'The Times to Host Political Polling Site FiveThirtyEight' By BRIAN STELTER

The New York Times said Thursday that it would begin hosting the popular blog FiveThirtyEight and make its founder, Nate Silver, a regular contributor to the newspaper and the Sunday magazine...
====================================
guess they announced their engagement simultaneously this morning...

Mule Rider said...

Jacob,

I'm going to give you a final chance to apologize to me for all of your hateful bile...and to bow to me as the superior intellect.

You know you are inferior scum, so quit pretending you're not.

Give me the respect I'm due you leftist piece of garbage!

Shots said...

Congrats Nate! See you at the Times!

Seth said...

Shouldn't we all just start ignoring Mule Rider? He/she is clearly just here to rile everybody up. It might not cause him/her to stop trolling, but at least it will avoid derailing the conversation. I say we just stop responding to his comments (unless they're intelligent, respectful attempts at debate, which they haven't been).

enterpriser said...

"I mean that it's pretty much standard operating procedure for most people to censor their opinions to please their boss. "


Wow, that is pretty freaking pathetic!!!

Why the hell do people do that for?

DCM in FL said...

oh no

if you failed to read the NY Times news release about their 'partnership', here is the last paragraph from it...

"Mr. Silver has tackled other topics on FiveThirtyEight as well: last April he published a comprehensive nutritional analysis of fast food sandwiches showing how they stacked up to a new KFC concoction called the Double Down. Mr. Keller’s statement indicated that The Times would incorporate Mr. Silver’s analysis of culture and sports along with politics."

LOL - that throw-away post about KFC & other fast foods is held up as anexample of what to expect from the new NYTimes blog ???

I would PAY for that...[not]

sorry Nate, but not a great roll-out especially on their end imho

Pan said...

#160: Mule Rider said...

But to your question, I drove away far more traffic by making the comment section unbearable for "civil" readers than I created with people willing to engage me with dialogue. Can you deny this?


I deny this.

I'm not saying what you do to the conversation is a good thing in absolute terms, but I will say it likely generates more traffic. Look at all the mainstream news, for example. Why do you think they run polarizing bickerfests instead of quality shows along the lines of PBS NewsHour? The bickerfests will always get the higher ratings.

Against my better judgement, sometimes I actually return to the comments just to see who you'll threaten to gut like a fish next.

Pan said...

#169: Seth said...

Shouldn't we all just start ignoring Mule Rider?


Probably should have in the past, but the problem is that there's always someone who'll take the bait, so there's not much point in avoiding it.

Of course, it's a moot point now with the NYT deal. Mules are about to become an endangered species on this blog.

DCM in FL said...

DNFTT !!!

seriously though, will miss the capability for instantaneous comment response with back & forth dialogue

[even with some of the trolls as Pan notes]

Redshift said...

I've been here since near the beginning, and with the exception of a few technical concerns, this looks like a positive development for all sides.

Congratulations!

Uncommon Senz said...

@ Seth, i agree.

it's one thing to be obnoxious when attacking a position (even if that attack itself seems like nothing more than incoherent ranting).

But this particular post should be about what people feel about the Ny Times move (which affects everyone who cares about this site) and offering congrats on Nate's success.

MR is just attention seeking, and has nothing to work with right now but "you all suck ha ha!!!". Let him tire himself out and just ignore him. (And while I am feeding that a bit by talking about him in this post, I am not responding to any particular thing he says anymore, just encouraging some group ignoring of a classless troll)

DCM in FL said...

expect CHARLES to show up soon since this thread is now approaching his magic # of 200...

he might be a noxious troll, but damm it - he was our poor pathetic homophobic moronic troll !!!

Mule Rider said...

Why the hell do people do that for?

How the hell should I know?! But what I do know is that when push comes to shove, (the majority of) people aren't willing to stand up for what they know to be right and will just do what pleases their superiors.

I deny this.

We will have to respectfully disagree then.

Of course, it's a moot point now with the NYT deal. Mules are about to become an endangered species on this blog.

Oh, I'll readily admit that my days with you guys are numbered. Once this goes to the NYT, I won't be following. This isn't like days of yore when I said I would stay away, only to eventually return. This is truly a game changer and not something I will adapt with.

10kZebra said...

@ Erik I hope this is resulting in Scrooge-McDuck-like pools of money for the fine folks here.
HA! What a great visual!

Congrats Nate. I believe it will be a great fit and you deserve it.

Jacob said...

Mule said...

...apologize for the hateful bile...bow to me as the superior intellect...


OK I gotta admit that one made me chuckle. Mule, you're a douchebag but I would miss having you around.

Mule Rider said...

Shouldn't we all just start ignoring Mule Rider?

Yes, you should. Unfortunately, though, for some of you, there have been just enough people feeding me over the last couple of years to keep me alive and well.

You can bet your sweet ass that I'm going to go out with one big unhinged bang with the current relationship about to terminate.

Mule Rider said...

Mule, you're a douchebag but I would miss having you around.

As some have already suggested, I have contributed to Nate's success.

You could even argue...he needs me.

Mule Rider said...

So when are you going to bow to me as the superior intellect, Jacob?

Mule Rider said...

Looks like I've derailed yet another thread....and one that was supposed to be a congratulatory response to Nate's impeding move to NYT. Score one for Muley.

Surprised he hasn't deleted any of my posts in this thread...come to think of it, it's been awhile since Nate has done that.

wes said...

i'm not a big fan of the NY Times, but congratulations anyways! i don't say this often to people i don't know, but i'm proud of you Nate & everyone at 538!

Leigh said...

Congratulations! Another winner from The University of Chicago! Seriously, it is heartwarming to see excellence rewarded - too often it is not.

PoliticalWiz said...

Hope the NYT does NOT expect this blogger to subscribe to get 538 only.

I give a damn about 99% of the NYT content, why would I pay full price for 1%.

No way, no how.

DCM in FL said...

Kos just went 'off' on Ras...

'Rasmussens' mid-course corrections'

@ http://www.dailykos.com/


thanks again to Nate for finally starting to call out Ras for being so Ras-sy...

there has been a noticeable effect across the blogoshpere & especially in Ras' polling

Adam said...

The New York Times is America's newspaper of record. Its online presence has consistently lead the industry in quality and scope. As a human institution, it has its flaws and has made (and will continue to make) its mistakes, but it certainly has never settled for mediocrity.

In other words, it's a great fit. Kudos to you, Nate.

shiloh said...

DCM in FL said...

he might be a noxious troll, but damn it - he was our poor pathetic homophobic moronic troll !!!
~~~~~~~~~~


That's the thing lol ~ NYT, WP, WSJ and other highfalutin blogs er political forums will never have the atmosphere/ambiance er joie de vivre/je ne sais quoi ;) that 538 has managed to attain.

C'est la vie!

>

and Mule, would you like some freedom fries w/your whine and cheese er sour grapes!

Mule, we hardly knew ye lol

>

Again, this is what's wrong w/the news media ie Nate is the center of attention and not the actual news reporters should be covering.

ie is Katie Couric still the highest paid news reader as I've lost track.

The pundit has become a wannabe celebrity!

but, but, but again Nate, congrats! although you may need a makeover for you next appearance on Tweety/Keith/Rachel ~ may I suggest contact lenses ...

sherifffruitfly said...

Shorter Nate:

KA-CHING!!!

DCM in FL said...

IIRC, Nate's previous 'partnership' was linking up with Rasmussen Reports back in '08 [?]

how did THAT work out... lol

just sayin'... but watch your backside there, Nate

Jacob said...

Mule Rider said...

So when are you going to bow to me as the superior intellect, Jacob?


As soon as you demonstrate that intellect.

(I'm not holding my breath)

jesse said...

Congrats Guys,
just watch the quality around you when you get there. You say it's great, and I think that's mostly true, but things like the absolute disregard for fact by the Ombudsman on the O'Keefe in pimp suit thing is disturbing.
I'll miss you guys if it goes paywall.

Mark Grebner said...

@TIWolfman:
"First off, Larry Page was from Ann Arbor, he went to high school there, .... He's never had anything to do with East Lansing. "

Being completely wrong yet utterly sure, in many fields, would make you a menace. I hope you practice a profession where no one's safety or welfare depends upon your judgment.

Larry Page spent almost exactly the first half of his life here in East Lansing. (He's now 37.) He was born here, spent his childhood here, and graduated from East Lansing High School. His father taught Computer Science at MSU. As far as I know, his mother continues to live here.

DCM in FL said...

hhhmmmm...

I can find no evidence on either RR or 538 of the 2008 linkage between the 2 sites...

I KNOW it happened & recall Nate posting on the 'partnership', but they both seem to have perhaps attempted to wipe it away ???

new post up on the lessons of Coakley... [hoping Alex Sink reads it cuz she is on a martha-style path here in FL - and Chiles running as an IND is not gonna help her in Nov]

The Liberal Elite said...

It blows my mind how many people say they love your site but refuse to pay anything for it.

You have a right to make a living too, Nate.

You might want to ditch 538 if it goes behind a paywall, but you know you won't find a site that's as good.

Congrats Nate. Good stuff.

gilhodges said...

I have been a daily visitor from (very nearly) the beginning and have appreciated your excellent work. Though I fear that your independence will be co-opted by the mucky-mucks, I'm thrilled that your hard work has attained such a high-profile platform (and hope its made you a well-earned wad of cash.)

Congrats.

e2thex said...

Congrats, would like to echo concerns over rss and paid wall. This blog as a 99% read ratio in my google reader, but if I am just getting summaries I expect that to drop

Opus 132 said...

Congratulations,Nate.Well deserved is an understatement!

What surprises me is the lack of faith in Nate's ability to maintain complete independence shown by many posters here today.I don't doubt Nate all in that regard.

Nor do I doubt that The Times wants Nate to be an independent blogger.That's one of the things that makes this deal attractive to the paper in the first place.