13569 messages in 1351 discussions
Latest 9:55 AM by Cstar1
Latest Sep-15 by joegabe11
Latest Sep-11 by bella (isabella555)
Latest Aug-21 by Cstar1
Latest Aug-19 by Kenny (GoofBall1983)
27294 messages in 3005 discussions
Latest Sep-17 by LoveRiot
Latest Sep-15 by Grandma Sue (STAMPCRAZY)
Latest Aug-26 by gunter
Latest Aug-26 by HWPeeler (HPeeler)
29055 messages in 4404 discussions
Latest Sep-15 by kidmagnet (Kid) (Kidmagnet)
Latest Sep-15 by DONNAG
Latest Sep-11 by kidmagnet (Kid) (Kidmagnet)
Latest Sep-5 by YoungGandalf
Latest Sep-1 by Ann (ANNJONES1)
Latest Aug-29 by StephS (StephShane)
Latest Aug-23 by HWPeeler (HPeeler)
59643 messages in 6423 discussions
Latest 10/22/17 by kidmagnet (Kid) (Kidmagnet)
Latest Sep-13 by gunter
Latest Sep-5 by gunter
Latest Aug-26 by kidmagnet (Kid) (Kidmagnet)
Latest Aug-23 by Cstar1
23387 messages in 566 discussions
Latest Sep-5 by Lyndy (Lyndy7)
Latest Aug-28 by Jeri (azpaints)
24797 messages in 2226 discussions
Latest Aug-29 by gunter
Latest Aug-27 by gmc_blue
4827 messages in 635 discussions
2623 messages in 344 discussions
8205 messages in 1201 discussions
6124 messages in 457 discussions
10008 messages in 877 discussions
6528 messages in 670 discussions
832 messages in 43 discussions
1042 messages in 491 discussions
The Nyt has their page set to feature the viglinks ad when you are connecting from a third party. If you google nyt you don't get the viglink ad page but if you go there from a link from a 3rd party then you do. I have this happen when reading a CNN article or Reuters that have a link to the original NYT article.
I guess that's probably the cause. Thank you! I'll just have to pick up the link from source code.
Cstar, no difference when I disable the ad blocker and the tracking blocker, still goes to the shopping page. I think Jeri may have the answer. But still a bit odd that right-clicking shows the redirect link.
Thanks to all for your help.
A workaround is to opt out of Viglink here:
Then be sure to keep the Viglink cookies.
After opting out, I still got a shopping page, but with a link to the NYT article so I could continue there. Still not a happy camper, but better than getting stuck on a shopping page.
IIRC, there is another newspaper site that does the same thing, but not one I normally read, so can't remember which one...I prefer this, with the link to the real article to the WashPost that requires you to sign up and subscribe! I have adblocker and still get it, too.
Glen (GEAATL) said:
I've seen that a couple times, and when I have a common denominator seems to be that I used a link for the news article that came in email rather than from the main site (like a newspaper's mail). Those links often are lengthy and have ad coding built in (if you play with them there often is the regular link, then a question mark, then some code which tends to be ad related or tracking related, and if I'm careful I can edit it down to a shorter working link to the article. I'm guessing viglink interacts with some of the ad links.
I think Glen hit on it with his post - if I go to the NYT's site and copy from the article it does not paste in the same way as the one on the Meta forum. I think digyourgig is pasting them from a newsletter link.
Funny - when I open one of the messages you linked with IE it goes straight to the NYT site. But with the same browser, the other message leads to the Viglink site where there's a large View Article button. When I use Firefox to view the same links they lead to the page you see with no way to advance to the article.
You can opt out but other viewers could run into the same problem and that's a little frustrating for the host who misses out on member interaction.
You can link him here and we cold help him find a better way to achieve this.
One other difference with the NYTimes and many other news sites is the actual code of their news articles (which does as I note differ based on the initial method you use to get to a story). Some of the means of access now land you on a html style page where you can't use copy/paste at all (I've gotten creative, used view source, where you can scroll to the news part of a page and copy the actual html into a post, but that's rather time intensive). I am guessing some news sites are wanting to make it harder for people to do what hosts here (and bloggers) do with all those snippets, so people have to go direct to the source.
If more sites start coding like the Times, you'll see a lot less copy/paste or see hosts pushed more into doing them from emails (where we'll pick up the ad links). I think it's likely very deliberate.
If you grab the address you can use Zeta's embed media tool to embed a snippit (not sure if this link is a static one) even on Classic forum by tricking your browser with the /zeta after the webtag. No copy/paste of the actual article needed.
The drawback to my plan being - the images are not resized automatically so I have to edit it in classic to shring the image or risk scaring the pants off people.
Thanks for experimenting! I like FF and use it all the time, though I have other browsers on this machine. I might check with Chrome, Safari and Opera and see how they deal with the NYT links.
That's odd that they links behave differently from the different sources when the link is exactly the same. I've been getting them from source code. If I wasn't such a lazy bum I might fiddle with those links some more. ;-)
I'll mention this thread to him in Meta.
I've noticed some of the news sites don't let you copy any text from articles. In Firefox there's a button in the address box to view the page in "reader" mode, and then I can copy text. Other times, when that button isn't in the address box, I've gone to source code and copied from there. But as you said, it's tedious, whether you copy/paste the source code into a post or paste into a text editor and strip the HTML so you can past the plain text into a post (my preference).