I was a NY Times subscriber for a few years more than you were an opinion writer there. I canceled my subscription last summer, finally too disgusted by the paper's editorial decisions to continue.
I didn’t realize that the Times was in favor of W Bush war in Iraq. I wrote a letter in my state daily at the time, The Hartford Courant and I was proud they published it. At the same time I thought I had probably been placed on a no fly list, lol. A full 65% of the population believed Bush and his servants. Why was I so sure of the lies and 65% believing. I still have no respect for those who prostituted themselves. Today we have a similar crap taking place. The majority is so gullible.
Yeah, but they had a whole slew of mealy mouthed center-right writers along with a constant flow of op-eds from RW propaganda mills like Hudson and the Heritage institute.
That's a silly comment. The NY Times not honoring a perspective by refusing to publish it isn't censorship. The NY Times shouldn't be publishing propaganda. And as one of the most prestigious papers in the world surely has their pick of writers surely they can do better than the likes of Bret Stephens, David Brooks, Pamela Paul, et al.
While I rarely agree with Brooks, he was the only one there saying that the Harris campaign needed to address/speak out on immigration and the economy. And he was right. I don't think he's that bad. Also, he does a good job on the PBS news-hour.
Mr Krugman, you were one of my favourite NYT columnists and I was saddened when you left, but considered it overall a good thing as I had found your columns had become a bit drab. Now I know why. Delighted to have found you on here :)
I always looked forward to your columns in the Times and especially agreed with you on your assessment of the Iraq War. Kind of wondering what the editors would do if a modern day Daniel Ellsberg called up?
I’m a big fan of being a broken record, especially when nobody listens to you. I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, all journalists covering social policy should be required to take at least a year off masters level applied statistics. The current state of reporting on social issues is like getting pontificated to about Shakespeare by somebody who doesn’t know how to read. Of course they don’t think your newsletter is important. Numbers are scary!
I was a long-time paying subscriber to the NYT. Their continued lack of honest coverage of Trump, especially during the NY trial, and continued downplay of facing the dangers to our freedoms sent me to the unsubscribe/cancelation column. I now subscribe to Paul Krugman here! Thanks for never giving up and for standing your ground.
It's a little shocking me to that the Times didn't work harder to make you want to stay. Between you, Brooks, Friedman, and Ezra, the Times has/had an incredible group of all stars. But you're arguably both the best writer and the sharpest thinker of the group, and having a Nobel winning economist pesumably was something for the Times to be proud of.
But the Times loss is Substack and our gain. Love the increased number of pieces we're now getting from you!
The Washington Post surrendered and I canceled it, then the New York Times submitted and I canceled it as well. I pay for journalism not stenography. At least journalism is still alive and well in the Atlantic, the Economist, and on Substack. That's about all we have left in our post-truth dystopia…
Lots of people have opinions on policy. I sure do. But very few are successful economists. To think, “well, we lost Krugman but we still have Peter Coy,” is to misunderstand the nature of expertise.
In my estimation, it was a poor business decision on the Times part to try micro-managing/mismanaging a writer who was probably their best asset. The NYT is spiraling down the drain at an increasing rate. Sad to see.
You made the right decision to leave legacy media - but since Tech-fascist Marc Andreessen is a Substack funder, don't expect things to stay the way they are, once Andreessen decides he wants control here the way Musk has control on Twitter.
There are alternatives that are less Nazi-friendly.
Ok, that was a disturbing read. Bad enough X-man (the tycoon/financier formerly known as Elon Musk) has screwed up twitter - not that I was ever a fan of twitter.
Substack deleted my original account at Taibbi’s behest and that day posted new Terms of Moderation as CYA. I personally will never subscribe to another Substack after subscribing to Taibbi right before he realized how much money Trump supporters were willing to pay him to say nutty things. What a disappointment!!
I don't think you have to be too paranoid. Just don't subscribe to the lunatic fringe, and certainly don't post any reasonable comments on their posts. Taibbi was part of the lunatic fringe long before Trump. According to the Wikipedia page on him: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Taibbi
he started his career working for the former Soviet Union. He's been compared to Hunter S. Thompson.
No, he just initially worked in Russia. He opposed the Iraq War and was on the right side of most issues under Bush/Cheney. Unfortunately he went full Glenn Greenwald and you never go full Glenn Greenwald! I’ve known several people that became wealthy overnight and he displayed all of the signs of coming into a big windfall with the Twitter Files. I think he saw me as maybe a threat and because he was making so much money for Substack the Founders just deleted my account because I had so few followers. Taibbi tried to get me to cancel my subscription but I told him I wasn’t going to renew it and I would only be commenting a few more weeks.
Other than Taibbi clearly made several million dollars over a very short period of time. My friends that made that kind of money became very paranoid when they realized they were entitled to the money but before their bosses deposited the money into their accounts. So Taibbi was behaving very paranoid and I was the only commenter that was critical of him. Substack is just making things worse because it is creating echo chambers. My friends eventually calmed down and started acting normal again…other than a private jet flight here and there. 😉
(Freddie also wrote this https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/these-rules-about-platforming-nazis, which was specifically about the controversy but combines some points I agree with a bunch of personal attacks and invective that I don't; to be clear, I think folks like Jonathan Katz and Casey Newton were sincere, just misguided).
DeBoer is a grifter, part of the Bari Weiss gang- but I can see you're a big fan of that whole mob so that explains your tolerance for racists and neo-Nazis.
Loury, Persuasion, Sam Harris, Yglesias, Scott Alexander, Valdary, Weiss, Coleman Hughes, Shellenberger, Taibbi - is there any reactionary grifter or Quillette author you DON'T love?
I'm a huge fan of Persuasion, Harris, Yglesias, (and Noah Smith, Damon Linker, Nate Silver, and Andrew Sullivan), all of whom I happily pay for. Loury as well. I'm also a satisfied paid subscriber to Ross Barkan and Radley Balko. The Free Press is a mixed bag, but I pay for it because a family member works there.
Shellenberger and Taibbi I strongly dislike, but I subscribe to them so I know what they're saying (although it's kind of pointless because I won't pay for them and they essentially never post anything for free). The same is true of Peter Beinart on the "other side."
Other politically focused writer I like (but don't pay for) include Micah Sifry, Ruy Teixiera, Oren Cass, Don Moynihan, Jennifer Pahlka, Brad Delong, and Noah Millman (who may be the most intellectually interesting writer on Substack).
Long story short, I subscribe to a lot of different folks, some of who I agree with and some of whom I don't. I find both valuable.
The ONLY reason I'm here is for Krugman - and I won't even go to payer level although I've paid for Krugman content in the past on other platforms.
Substack is part of the fascist plutocracy network, just like Free Press and Quillette.
It's disappointing that Krugman, who does not need Substack's money or help in getting noticed, is here, where there are dummies who take Sam Harris and racist Andrew Sullivan and other right-wing ghouls seriously.
It is dispiriting to see legacy media dulling down its voice. I was hired at CBS News in the 90s to report on corporate misconduct, all kinds of it. My scripts sailed through without interference. Slowly, layers of senior producers, lawyers, and worry worts made my reports blander. Finally, I broke an investigation of Nike's sweatshops in Vietnam. And I learned a deal was made between Nike & CBS requiring correspondents wear Nike jackets on air at the Winter Olympics. I fired off an email to all CBS executive producers pointing out the violations of their own CBS News Policy. I asked why viewers would trust us after seeing correspondents dressed as billboards for a sponsor to promote Nikes. For me, that's when the Tiffany Network lost its shine and I resigned. Paul, it's inspiring to hear your voice unfettered by the Old Gray Lady's nannies.
My dad, an enthusiastic 1964 Goldwater concert, was the editorial page editor of the Pensacola News Journal from 1966 until his untimely death at age 57 in 1989. For 23 years he wrote five editorials a day, five days a week, plus a one-thousand word personal column every week, usually 48 weeks out of every 52. My guess is he generated more than 6 million words in that post
I am sorry he didn't live long enough to read your NYT columns as I have done these past 25 years. My guess is he would have disagreed with most of them, sometimes vociferously, but I know he would have appreciated the craftsmanship and clarity, and would have been proud to have your work on his editorial page. I have no doubt he would have said, "Now THAT is a columnist!"
I am very sorry to hear that your experience at The Times this past year has been just as bad as I thought it must be. Very sorry, too, that the NYT management seems completely to have forgotten what journalism is all about. I cancelled my subscription the week after the election, mourning only your absence.
Very happy that you are continuing your work as an independent voice. It has been delightful to see you unleashed.
Thanks for fighting the good fight. Like Heather Cox Richardson, you are indispensable for anyone wanting to understand this American moment.
One of the main reasons that I subscribed to the NYT was to read Paul Krugman’s articles. It was such a breath of fresh air. When I saw that he had published his last, I felt terrible. It’s like I lost my child at the county fair and he’s gone -> panic! What am I going to do now the next 4 years without his clear-eyed opinions? Alas, I found him in SubStack and subscribe to his column. I am truly thrilled and relieved. Thank you Paul Krugman, and to quote fellow economics professor Ben Bernanke during his commencement speech at Princeton in 2013, “give ‘em hell!”, as he sent the graduates out into the world!
Thank you for those 25 years of bringing economic reality and data driven thinking to the broad readership of the Times! And for resigning on principal. Its sad that such an important institution feels it should be about infotainment and not trying to convey real information any more. I'm not a historian but I've noted with dismay over many Times articles about the war in Ukraine that seemed to have been written by poetry majors who couldn't tell a Mauser rifle from a javelin.
I was a NY Times subscriber for a few years more than you were an opinion writer there. I canceled my subscription last summer, finally too disgusted by the paper's editorial decisions to continue.
Me too.
I didn’t realize that the Times was in favor of W Bush war in Iraq. I wrote a letter in my state daily at the time, The Hartford Courant and I was proud they published it. At the same time I thought I had probably been placed on a no fly list, lol. A full 65% of the population believed Bush and his servants. Why was I so sure of the lies and 65% believing. I still have no respect for those who prostituted themselves. Today we have a similar crap taking place. The majority is so gullible.
The Times in 2024 did a magnificent endorsement of Harris.
Yeah, but they had a whole slew of mealy mouthed center-right writers along with a constant flow of op-eds from RW propaganda mills like Hudson and the Heritage institute.
Are you suggesting censorship? That extreme opinions shouldn't be published?
I want to know what the loons are "thinking." Especially people like fraud Brooks.
Why you are attacking the Times, I don't why.
That's a silly comment. The NY Times not honoring a perspective by refusing to publish it isn't censorship. The NY Times shouldn't be publishing propaganda. And as one of the most prestigious papers in the world surely has their pick of writers surely they can do better than the likes of Bret Stephens, David Brooks, Pamela Paul, et al.
They certainly can and I'm thinking they can do it without my money
Turns out Brooks only writes to support his liquor habit…glug glug glug hiccup! 🥃 🥃 🥃
Does that mean if we guarantee him a lifetime supply of booze he'll stop? I'd pay into a GoFundMe for that.
Have any proof? Or are you just smearing him?
While I rarely agree with Brooks, he was the only one there saying that the Harris campaign needed to address/speak out on immigration and the economy. And he was right. I don't think he's that bad. Also, he does a good job on the PBS news-hour.
I bet you're one of those people that likes those fancy Italian ham sandwiches and can afford that $80 tab for a hamburger and fries*.
* Oh yeah, and a liter of scotch.
So don't read it. Problem solved.
Nor will I pay for it with my subscription fees.
That's easy to do - if you can sit through Faux News, or Newsmax, or Breitbart, etc.
Off topic snark.
It may have been snarky but it wasn't off topic.
Mr Krugman, you were one of my favourite NYT columnists and I was saddened when you left, but considered it overall a good thing as I had found your columns had become a bit drab. Now I know why. Delighted to have found you on here :)
I always looked forward to your columns in the Times and especially agreed with you on your assessment of the Iraq War. Kind of wondering what the editors would do if a modern day Daniel Ellsberg called up?
They would turn him in immediately.
Why wonder, Mr. Wonder?
Why not?
I wonder like you....
I’m a big fan of being a broken record, especially when nobody listens to you. I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, all journalists covering social policy should be required to take at least a year off masters level applied statistics. The current state of reporting on social issues is like getting pontificated to about Shakespeare by somebody who doesn’t know how to read. Of course they don’t think your newsletter is important. Numbers are scary!
I was a long-time paying subscriber to the NYT. Their continued lack of honest coverage of Trump, especially during the NY trial, and continued downplay of facing the dangers to our freedoms sent me to the unsubscribe/cancelation column. I now subscribe to Paul Krugman here! Thanks for never giving up and for standing your ground.
me too.
Ditto.
It's a little shocking me to that the Times didn't work harder to make you want to stay. Between you, Brooks, Friedman, and Ezra, the Times has/had an incredible group of all stars. But you're arguably both the best writer and the sharpest thinker of the group, and having a Nobel winning economist pesumably was something for the Times to be proud of.
But the Times loss is Substack and our gain. Love the increased number of pieces we're now getting from you!
Thanks for your honesty and integrity, Dr. Krugman.
The Washington Post surrendered and I canceled it, then the New York Times submitted and I canceled it as well. I pay for journalism not stenography. At least journalism is still alive and well in the Atlantic, the Economist, and on Substack. That's about all we have left in our post-truth dystopia…
👆🎯
Lots of people have opinions on policy. I sure do. But very few are successful economists. To think, “well, we lost Krugman but we still have Peter Coy,” is to misunderstand the nature of expertise.
So it’s not just the Washington Post.
What a foolish, cowardly decision by the Times. Your column was one of the few things in the paper that I always looked forward to reading.
In my estimation, it was a poor business decision on the Times part to try micro-managing/mismanaging a writer who was probably their best asset. The NYT is spiraling down the drain at an increasing rate. Sad to see.
You made the right decision to leave legacy media - but since Tech-fascist Marc Andreessen is a Substack funder, don't expect things to stay the way they are, once Andreessen decides he wants control here the way Musk has control on Twitter.
There are alternatives that are less Nazi-friendly.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/11/substack-extremism-nazi-white-supremacy-newsletters/676156/
Ok, that was a disturbing read. Bad enough X-man (the tycoon/financier formerly known as Elon Musk) has screwed up twitter - not that I was ever a fan of twitter.
You change the subject to Musk for some stupid reason.
That wasn't a subject change. Those two are inextricably enmeshed.
Must you be so obvious and shallow?
Why are you so mad someone is pointing out that Musk and Andreessen are both right-wing extremist ghouls?
Substack deleted my original account at Taibbi’s behest and that day posted new Terms of Moderation as CYA. I personally will never subscribe to another Substack after subscribing to Taibbi right before he realized how much money Trump supporters were willing to pay him to say nutty things. What a disappointment!!
I don't think you have to be too paranoid. Just don't subscribe to the lunatic fringe, and certainly don't post any reasonable comments on their posts. Taibbi was part of the lunatic fringe long before Trump. According to the Wikipedia page on him: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Taibbi
he started his career working for the former Soviet Union. He's been compared to Hunter S. Thompson.
Gibberish. Now you smear Thompson?
LOL - do you ever read anything outside of substack?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/the-two-expat-bros-who-terrorized-women-correspondents-in-moscow/2017/12/15/91ff338c-ca3c-11e7-8321-481fd63f174d_story.html
No, he just initially worked in Russia. He opposed the Iraq War and was on the right side of most issues under Bush/Cheney. Unfortunately he went full Glenn Greenwald and you never go full Glenn Greenwald! I’ve known several people that became wealthy overnight and he displayed all of the signs of coming into a big windfall with the Twitter Files. I think he saw me as maybe a threat and because he was making so much money for Substack the Founders just deleted my account because I had so few followers. Taibbi tried to get me to cancel my subscription but I told him I wasn’t going to renew it and I would only be commenting a few more weeks.
He got # me too ed and that put him over the edge.
Well then. That's a sad tale.
Other than Taibbi clearly made several million dollars over a very short period of time. My friends that made that kind of money became very paranoid when they realized they were entitled to the money but before their bosses deposited the money into their accounts. So Taibbi was behaving very paranoid and I was the only commenter that was critical of him. Substack is just making things worse because it is creating echo chambers. My friends eventually calmed down and started acting normal again…other than a private jet flight here and there. 😉
Taibbi spent his twenties in Russia, the atmosphere warped him.
ASSumptions.
And now it is time for ME to call U an ASS! 😉
parrot
The idea that Substack is "Nazi friendly" is ridiculous, and I think their policy is spot on.
Strongly recommend these three pieces that were a response to the Atlantic article (or to the approach that Katz is advocating for):
- Elle Griffin's open letter: https://www.elysian.press/p/substack-writers-for-community-moderation
- Ben Dreyfuss: https://www.calmdownben.com/p/substack-doesnt-have-a-nazi-problem
- Freddie DeBoer: https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/you-cant-censor-away-extremism-or
(Freddie also wrote this https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/these-rules-about-platforming-nazis, which was specifically about the controversy but combines some points I agree with a bunch of personal attacks and invective that I don't; to be clear, I think folks like Jonathan Katz and Casey Newton were sincere, just misguided).
DeBoer is a grifter, part of the Bari Weiss gang- but I can see you're a big fan of that whole mob so that explains your tolerance for racists and neo-Nazis.
https://substack.com/@gordonst/reads
Now tell us how cool you think Marc Andreessen is.
Can't stand Andreessen's political turn.
I'm clear on what I think of Trump:
https://gordonstrause.substack.com/p/the-return-of-donald-trump-a-tragedy
Obviously, I'm not going to be a fan of anyone who supports him.
Jesse Singal - JFC!
Loury, Persuasion, Sam Harris, Yglesias, Scott Alexander, Valdary, Weiss, Coleman Hughes, Shellenberger, Taibbi - is there any reactionary grifter or Quillette author you DON'T love?
I'm a huge fan of Persuasion, Harris, Yglesias, (and Noah Smith, Damon Linker, Nate Silver, and Andrew Sullivan), all of whom I happily pay for. Loury as well. I'm also a satisfied paid subscriber to Ross Barkan and Radley Balko. The Free Press is a mixed bag, but I pay for it because a family member works there.
Shellenberger and Taibbi I strongly dislike, but I subscribe to them so I know what they're saying (although it's kind of pointless because I won't pay for them and they essentially never post anything for free). The same is true of Peter Beinart on the "other side."
Other politically focused writer I like (but don't pay for) include Micah Sifry, Ruy Teixiera, Oren Cass, Don Moynihan, Jennifer Pahlka, Brad Delong, and Noah Millman (who may be the most intellectually interesting writer on Substack).
Long story short, I subscribe to a lot of different folks, some of who I agree with and some of whom I don't. I find both valuable.
THIS IS WHO SUBSTACK IS - get a fucking clue!
"Elon Musk has been a vocal supporter of free speech."
https://read.substack.com/p/the-fight-for-free-speech-in-2025
The ONLY reason I'm here is for Krugman - and I won't even go to payer level although I've paid for Krugman content in the past on other platforms.
Substack is part of the fascist plutocracy network, just like Free Press and Quillette.
It's disappointing that Krugman, who does not need Substack's money or help in getting noticed, is here, where there are dummies who take Sam Harris and racist Andrew Sullivan and other right-wing ghouls seriously.
It is dispiriting to see legacy media dulling down its voice. I was hired at CBS News in the 90s to report on corporate misconduct, all kinds of it. My scripts sailed through without interference. Slowly, layers of senior producers, lawyers, and worry worts made my reports blander. Finally, I broke an investigation of Nike's sweatshops in Vietnam. And I learned a deal was made between Nike & CBS requiring correspondents wear Nike jackets on air at the Winter Olympics. I fired off an email to all CBS executive producers pointing out the violations of their own CBS News Policy. I asked why viewers would trust us after seeing correspondents dressed as billboards for a sponsor to promote Nikes. For me, that's when the Tiffany Network lost its shine and I resigned. Paul, it's inspiring to hear your voice unfettered by the Old Gray Lady's nannies.
My dad, an enthusiastic 1964 Goldwater concert, was the editorial page editor of the Pensacola News Journal from 1966 until his untimely death at age 57 in 1989. For 23 years he wrote five editorials a day, five days a week, plus a one-thousand word personal column every week, usually 48 weeks out of every 52. My guess is he generated more than 6 million words in that post
I am sorry he didn't live long enough to read your NYT columns as I have done these past 25 years. My guess is he would have disagreed with most of them, sometimes vociferously, but I know he would have appreciated the craftsmanship and clarity, and would have been proud to have your work on his editorial page. I have no doubt he would have said, "Now THAT is a columnist!"
I am very sorry to hear that your experience at The Times this past year has been just as bad as I thought it must be. Very sorry, too, that the NYT management seems completely to have forgotten what journalism is all about. I cancelled my subscription the week after the election, mourning only your absence.
Very happy that you are continuing your work as an independent voice. It has been delightful to see you unleashed.
Thanks for fighting the good fight. Like Heather Cox Richardson, you are indispensable for anyone wanting to understand this American moment.
And now I understand why I wasn’t enjoying your columns over the last year but now, on Substack, your columns feel like an old friend is back.
One of the main reasons that I subscribed to the NYT was to read Paul Krugman’s articles. It was such a breath of fresh air. When I saw that he had published his last, I felt terrible. It’s like I lost my child at the county fair and he’s gone -> panic! What am I going to do now the next 4 years without his clear-eyed opinions? Alas, I found him in SubStack and subscribe to his column. I am truly thrilled and relieved. Thank you Paul Krugman, and to quote fellow economics professor Ben Bernanke during his commencement speech at Princeton in 2013, “give ‘em hell!”, as he sent the graduates out into the world!
Thank you for those 25 years of bringing economic reality and data driven thinking to the broad readership of the Times! And for resigning on principal. Its sad that such an important institution feels it should be about infotainment and not trying to convey real information any more. I'm not a historian but I've noted with dismay over many Times articles about the war in Ukraine that seemed to have been written by poetry majors who couldn't tell a Mauser rifle from a javelin.