As a newspaper journalist myself, I know that one of the chief attractions to prop up newspaper circulation is it’s sports coverage. Sadly, you have abandoned your readers by taking that out of the regular subscription. I don’t mind paying extra for the food app. It’s a specialized subject that appeals to some more than others. But sports coverage is always been part of the contract and expectation of any subscriber to a daily. It means now that any sports event, even if it has news value can only be red through your subscription to the Athletic. Lately there have been many sports stories that have cross cultural appeal, yet I’m denied reading them because I refuse to pay more for the app. I remain a subscriber because I know that your editorial coverage align with mine more than any other publication on a daily basis. That said, Part 2 and a bit of a jump cut here: l question what took you in so many others so long to start scrutinizing the cognitive mental demise of the Republican candidate for president? I applaud Mr. Baker Et Al For finally explaining what we all could see. But I feel like you’ve failed the American people on not showcasing this troubled man much sooner. The exposure you presented was spot on yet tardy In publication. So in the end, should things go terribly bad for our country, I hope I can find my way to Ireland, where I can learn the better points of hurling enjoy the all Irish finals… and read about it in full in the Irish Times

As a 30+ year subscriber to the New York Times, I wholeheartedly see it as an excellent newspaper and applaud its commitment to professional journalism. Insofar as the journalistic content delivered through the app, I give it 5-stars. That said, the design of the app needs some fine tuning. It is not as intuitive as other apps. I also subscribe to The Washington Post, the Financial Times, The Guardian, and The Wall Street Journal. Each of those apps offers a smoother user experience. But the most important difference between the NYT app and each of those other news apps is that the NYT app doesn’t permit swiping from one article to the next. Once I finish an article, I need to hit the app’s back button and manually select the next article. This makes the app cumbersome, particularly when I’m attempting to read the entire paper. What is concerning is why the app is set up this way. I can only assume that swiping from one article to the next doesn’t provide the Times with the click data it is looking for, either about me and my reading preferences or so that it can better track clicks of an article by all readers. Either way, the inability to swipe between articles has me relying on the other news apps as my primary news apps, with the Times as a secondary app. Dear New York Times, please correct this.

I use a VPN (a mainstream, widely available one) and many apps/sites don’t load properly. NYT’s app is odd because it works occasionally, but not usually—I don’t know if this is because of the VPN or if the app is just bad (but it seems to have a bunch of positive reviews so maybe it’s just me?). When I click on a push notification, it opens the app but only goes to the last article that was open, even if it was several weeks ago. Not useful. Then, if I search for the story, it only sometimes loads. I usually end up just using the website or relying on the morning briefing newsletter (so why am I paying for a subscription??). Another annoying aspect of the app is that you can’t zoom in on photos—I find myself doing this a lot on the website because there are interesting things to see and the phone screen is so small; it’s always a frustrating surprise when I try to zoom on the app and nothing happens. Aside from those specific issues, I also find it a little confusing/unintuitive how to find specific stories. Maybe I should be able to answer some questions about what interests me, and then it curates my home page based on my self-reported likes and my past views/reads. I could then use the “sections” page as a backup. Obviously NYT is the gold standard of journalism, but I’m surprised and irritated every time I remember how bad their app is. The app does look nice—I guess that’s worth +1 star.

Head and shoulders above anyone else in coverage of science and medicine. Their reporters sound like they have some scientific background, and they tap an impressive stable of well informed and credentialed commentators, usually specified as not having ties with the study under discussion.Their fashion and culture are increasingly focused on what’s cutting edge, not what’s true or beautiful, so not of much interest, except for some prurient interest in possessions of the wealthy, which feels degrading.Book coverage seems to have slightly reduced coverage of money, bids, and contracts, which surely belongs in the business section anyway. They also review some genre fiction, with further suggestions amended, which shows a lovely desire to connect readers to books they might enjoy.I still don’t feel that I can trust the news coverage. I am not a Trump fan, but the reporters all seem to have such an active loathing that it distorts coverage. IfTrump rescued a drowning puppy, they wouldn’t cover it, or they’d reassign staff to uncover a conspiracy between the White House and Big Puppy .So, it’s Left, Right, and Center for national news, the Times for science, books, Wirecutter, food and games. Also for some grand intelligent investigative reporting . You just have to look mighty hard now to find it.