2021年8月4日 星期三

On Tech: The subscription buffet may be over

Spotify, YouTube and others are experimenting with changing their one-size-fits-all digital subscriptions.

The subscription buffet may be over

Spotify, YouTube and others are experimenting with changing their one-size-fits-all digital subscriptions.

Asya Demidova

An all-you-can-eat buffet can be glorious. (Uh, at least before Covid-19.) Pay a single price and get options to tuck into roast beef, pizza, green beans, a chocolate fountain and more. It's gluttony made easy.

Many of the subscriptions to digital services work the same way. Netflix, Spotify and Amazon Prime typically charge one fee for access to a collection of goodies.

There are signs, however, that the all-you-can-eat digital subscriptions are becoming more nuanced. Some companies including Disney and Whole Foods, the grocery chain that is owned by Amazon, are charging subscribers more for compelling extras. Others including Spotify and YouTube are experimenting with subscriptions that cost less but come with compromises. Both strategies may show that the endless digital buffet is changing for good.

I don't know whether the subscription strategies will stick, or how we might respond to having more choices. Maybe you'd like the option to pay less at the buffet because you always skip dessert or to pay a little more for filet mignon. Or it could ruin the simple appeal of the buffet.

ADVERTISEMENT

Either way, we should get used to more experiments. This week, The Verge reported that both Spotify and YouTube are trying out lower-priced subscription offers with limitations. YouTube, which charges $12 a month in the United States for its video and music service without commercial breaks, is testing an offer in some European countries at less than half the usual rate. This offer excludes some of the typical features that paying customers receive, including the ability to download a video for later when you won't have an internet connection. Spotify is also experimenting with a limited offering for as low as 99 cents a month compared with a typical $10 monthly subscription.

Disney is going the other way by charging extra to Disney+ streaming subscribers who want to watch at home some of its newly released movies. Bloomberg News reported this week that Whole Foods is testing a $9.95 delivery fee in some U.S. cities. Until now, both Whole Foods and Amazon's Fresh grocery service have mostly not charged an additional delivery fee to Prime members. (Fresh will apparently not require a separate delivery fee. I don't get it, either.)

Many of the all-you-can-eat digital subscription services are a little nuanced already, with higher prices for households with more devices and less expensive subscriptions with limitations in some lower-income countries.

Mostly, though, these companies have a relatively straightforward proposition of a single price for everything that they offer. And there are potential risks when companies shift away from the all-you-can-eat model. People who already pay for Prime or Disney+ might feel ripped off when they're asked to pay even more. Lower-cost subscription options might entice users who had been paying full price.

ADVERTISEMENT

One of Netflix's overlooked superpowers is that there's (mostly) just one version, without add-ons for sports or new-release movies, or different prices with and without commercials. The simplicity of a single subscription offer removes the need to evaluate a bunch of options before deciding to sign up.

But the advantage of adding more subscription permutations is they might offer more people what they want. I don't pay for a subscription to Spotify, but I might be tempted if I could pay a little less even if I don't get all the goodies of full paying members. I could also imagine that an electronica fan might like a cheaper Spotify subscription that includes only the music that he's likely to listen to.

It can feel as if online subscriptions have been around forever, but they're a relatively new and still evolving feature of online life. I'm still not sold that subscriptions to everything are the best path, for either our wallets or the companies and people trying to earn a living online.

But it makes sense that subscription offers will start to fragment because not everyone wants the same thing. We might get more of exactly what we want, and we may come to miss the gluttony made simple.

If you don't already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Subscribe Today

We hope you've enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible through subscriber support. Subscribe to The New York Times with this special offer.

ADVERTISEMENT

Before we go …

  • Humanity's collective power is needed to fix our biggest problems. But my Opinion colleague Farhad Manjoo asks, "What if humanity's capacity to cooperate has been undone by the very technology we thought would bring us all together?"
  • Self-driving cars aren't mainstream, but they've already changed the labor market: Rest of World looks at how outsourced work has been altered as fleets of people in lower-income countries are training software to think more like human drivers — and that includes tasks such as labeling digital images of drops of water. (My colleague Cade Metz has also written about all of the humans needed to teach artificial intelligence software.)
  • In today's installment of "technology is not magic": Software algorithms intended to help hospitals quickly diagnose coronavirus patients or predict how sick they might become mostly didn't make a difference and some might have made things worse, MIT Technology Review reports.Related: Peanut the waiter robot is bad at its job.

Hugs to this

I am in love with this horse dancing and prancing to nightclub music. (Here is more on Mopsi and his human rider Steffen Peters at the Olympics.)

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you'd like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don't already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here. You can also read past On Tech columns.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech With Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/

Parenting Through Terminal Illness

As their father fights to live, my children and I learn how to grieve.

Parenting Through Terminal Illness

By Kelsie Snow

Mikyung Lee

One night last fall, as I sat in bed with my 9-year-old son, Cohen, he looked up at me through tears and asked, "Do you think Daddy will have a long life or a short life?"

It was a big question from a little boy, but not an unexpected one.

Two years ago, my husband, Chris, was diagnosed with the progressive neurodegenerative disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or A.L.S. Doctors said he had six to 12 months to live. He was 37 at the time.

Thanks to a promising clinical trial Chris is still very much alive, but the experimental medicine injected into his spine every four weeks has not worked perfectly. He first lost the use of his dominant hand, and then, after nine months of no disease progression, his face started to change. What began as a slightly lopsided smile snowballed into almost total atrophy of his facial muscles. His lips weakened, so he could no longer purse them together to make consonant sounds or to kiss us. Then his swallowing muscles deteriorated, and he began choking on his food.

It was terrifying for all of us. For Cohen, the panic was palpable. His heart would race. He would sob and sweat and look at me desperately for reassurance that his dad was not going to choke and die. Our 6-year-old daughter, Willa, would reassure her brother, and herself, with a mantra we created for these episodes: "It's OK, Cohen. Remember, coughing is not choking."

After Chris was diagnosed, people often told me, "The kids will be all right," and while I understood the sentiment, I found it an immense oversimplification. The path to "all right" would undoubtedly be long, winding and, ultimately, up to me and Chris. We started reading about kids and grief; found therapists that were a good fit for both Cohen and Willa; and sought the advice of experts who work with families facing terminal illness.

ADVERTISEMENT

Andrea Warnick, a Toronto-based psychotherapist who holds a master's degree in thanatology, which is the study of dying, death and bereavement, has spent more than 20 years supporting grieving families and kids. She told me that while helping a grieving child can feel overwhelming, the most important elements are simple: Caregivers should work to form a secure attachment with the child and to facilitate open, honest communication.

"I consistently see so many families where really hard stuff happens, and those kids are still able to thrive in the world," Ms. Warnick said. "Those kids have adults in their life who are emotionally available to them."

A secure attachment, Ms. Warnick said, means that a child feels safe coming to a parent with anything that is on their mind, and that the parent accepts those questions and feelings without judgment.

"I talked to a parent last week and the question was, 'When my brother dies, can I get his Nintendo gaming system?'" Ms. Warnick said. "The parent was horrified, but I'm like, 'Don't shut it down! It doesn't mean he's not grieving his brother. It doesn't mean he's not upset that his brother's got cancer. It's just a very practical question.'"

ADVERTISEMENT

She said that parents who have an ill partner should strive to be as honest as possible with their grieving kids, even when honesty is hard. But establishing free-flowing communication doesn't mean you'll magically have all the answers. According to Diane Vines, a marriage and family therapist and clinical consultant for the Houston-based ChildTrauma Academy, how we react to a child's emotions can sometimes be more important than what we say.

During those moments when Chris stood up from the dinner table gasping for air and our son panicked, the key, Ms. Vines said, was that I did not.

"When you're watching somebody you love possibly choke to death, that's upsetting," she said. "We look around to see, should we panic right now? What should we be doing right now? What is everyone else doing?"

When parents manage those feelings with relative calm, children will often feel reassured and react more calmly, too, she said.

ADVERTISEMENT

One day during those traumatic weeks before Chris got a feeding tube inserted to help with the choking, I was driving Cohen to hockey practice when out of the blue he said, "My life is harder than a lot of other kids my age." I told him he wasn't wrong, that I was sorry and that I love him. I asked what was on his mind. He shrugged. He didn't seem sad or angry or worried or scared. He was simply stating a fact.

Most parents who contact Ms. Warnick are looking for the right language to use with their children, she said. "The harder job is actually being able to bear witness to our children's suffering," she added. "I think one of the most wonderful things we can do for kids is teach them about grief, and teach them that they have the capacity to survive their feelings, even the most intense ones."

Some months after Chris's feeding tube had alleviated our kids' panic, I tucked Willa into bed. That night she giggled and hugged me as hard as she could. "You know what, Mommy?" she said. "Sometimes I forget that Daddy has this sickness."

I kissed her cheeks and told her I was so happy she has those moments of forgetfulness. Letting kids know that it's OK to forget about their sadness and feel happy, Ms. Warnick said, is important.

"It doesn't mean that you're happy because your dad has A.L.S.; it means it's absolutely OK to enjoy life and be happy, even though your dad has A.L.S.," she said.

She reminded me that grief isn't a problem that needs fixing.

"I'm always trying to help kids understand that grief is not pathology," Ms. Warnick said. "There's nothing broken. It's a natural response to a hard situation, and it's rooted in your love for your person."

Their father's terminal illness is a part of my kids' reality — I can't change that. Instead, I will try my hardest to bear witness to their suffering. It won't be perfect. I won't always get it right, but we'll do it together.

Read More About Family and Grief

  • The pandemic has brought illness and death front and center for many families. Dr. Perri Klass and science writer Melinda Wenner Moyer each explored how to approach grieving with children.
  • Marisha Pessl and Sophie Blackall wrote about books that can help explain death to children and start conversations about grief.
  • Films about the fragility of life can similarly help parents explain loss to kids; Stacy Brick suggested 7 movies to help children dealing with grief.
  • Jessica Grose wondered in a previous NYT Parenting newsletter why small children often want to talk about death.
  • Christina Caron tapped experts for suggestions on how to begin healing in a season of grief.

Subscribe Today

We hope you've enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible through subscriber support. Subscribe to The New York Times with this special offer.

Tiny Victories

Parenting can be a grind. Let's celebrate the tiny victories.

My 4-year-old is obsessed with the Olympics right now. To encourage her to clean up her messes, my husband and I turn her chore into an Olympic event. We pretend to be the announcers and if she completes the task and breaks the world record, it's a gold medal! — Amy Gabbert, Minneapolis

If you want a chance to get your Tiny Victory published, find us on Instagram @NYTparenting and use the hashtag #tinyvictories; email us; or enter your Tiny Victory at the bottom of this page. Include your full name and location. Tiny Victories may be edited for clarity and style. Your name, location and comments may be published, but your contact information will not. By submitting to us, you agree that you have read, understand and accept the Reader Submission Terms in relation to all of the content and other information you send to us.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for Parenting from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/