What to do about loyal subscribers to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer now that their newspaper no longer exists? If you’re the Seattle Times
Company, which, under a joint operating agreement between the two
newspapers, was printing and delivering the P-I anyway, it’s both a
problem and an opportunity. Somewhere high in the company’s chain of
command, a shrewd businessperson must have looked at this situation
said: “Hey, why not slip them a Seattle Times instead?”

Because that’s exactly what the Times is doing.

Unless they call and opt out, Seattle Post-Intelligencer subscribers
will be getting copies of the Seattle Times for the remainder of their
subscriptions—and, who knows, perhaps even longer if the
struggling Times thinks it will help boost its readership. “We’ve had a
great response,” said Times spokeswoman Jill Mackie.

But it’s clear the positive response to the program is far from
unanimous. Loyal P-I readers have complained, called the Times to say
they want the P-I or nothing at all, and even wondered if the
substitution is legal. “If I subscribe to the P-I, I signed up for the
P-I, not the Times,” said Seattle attorney David Osgood. “There’s an
implied and an expressed contract.”

Mackie wouldn’t get into the legal chapter and verse. She also
wouldn’t say how many people have stopped delivery of the Times under
the new scheme (though she said it was a small minority). But she did
say the Times sees things differently from those raising the specter of
illegal business practices. “We feel comfortable that we’re in full
compliance with the law,” she said.

But how does the state attorney general’s office, which investigates
complaints about illegal business practices, feel?

“I’m not able to answer your question regarding, ‘Is this legal or
is this not legal,'” said Kristen Alexander, media-relations officer
for state attorney general Rob McKenna. However, the AG’s office “is
not concerned provided that subscribers have the option to cancel,
which they do,” Alexander said.

Those who wish to cancel can’t do it online, though. While you can
easily subscribe to the Times online, to keep it from coming to your
house automatically if you were a former P-I subscriber, you must call
464-2121 or e-mail customerservice@seattletimes.com. recommended

Stranger news editor Erica C. Barnett contributed reporting.

Eli Sanders was The Stranger's associate editor. His book, "While the City Slept," was a finalist for the Washington State Book Award and the Dayton Literary Peace Prize. He once did this and once won...

17 replies on “Substitution Method”

  1. We called and told them to stop delivering after the 17th of March (PI’s last day.) No paper on the 18th. Sad to be without the PI, but glad that the Times honored our cancellation.

    Thursday the 19th-
    Seattle Times shows up on the porch.
    Another phone call, another assurance that the Times will not be delivered again.

    Thursday the 26th-
    Seven more days of the Times in the recycling bin, unread. So much for the opt out option.

  3. It’s certainly not comforting to know that the State’s leading law enforcement official isn’t too keen on upholding the law in the most obvious case. The Seattle Times’ plan is a crystal clear violation of Washington State Law regarding unsolicited goods.

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?…

    And the WA law specifically cites newspapers to not pull these stunts.

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?…

    Hey Kristen Alexander! You better go back to your boss and tell ol’ Rob that it’s time to re-think this one. It is million of consumer $$$, and and this one is gonna’ come-back to haunt you. (Candidates: Next time you’re running against Rob, you can simply point this out as payback for the Times’ last endorsement of McKenna.)

    About 150,000 people have effectively been told that they are going to owe money for a product they didn’t specifically order. This would have to be the single-largest case of consumer protection violation in Washington state – ever.

    The fact that you CAN call to cancel isn’t the point. The requirement to take action by the consumer is what these TWO laws explicitly prohibit.

    The Attorney General’s office is going to look pretty bad in the coming weeks, as more subscription invoices start being mailed-out, and more former P-I readers start to question why their money was taken.

    Our AG better wake the hell up!

  4. Nice to see that at least some states an Attorney General who will uphold the law. (And publishers with a shred of integrity.)

    http://crosscut.com/2009/02/11/media/188…

    “…because Wisconsin has a “negative option rule” every subscription transfer had to be individually approved by the subscriber…”

    We have that same law in our state, but apparently Rob McKenna isn’t bothered with our laws when it affects his chances for political endorsement. (Maybe that’s an even better story for The Stranger to pursue: With such an obvious violation of the law, why won’t the AG take action? Curious.)

    And uf the P-I is so damn interested in making a name for itself, its a wonder that they won’t go to bat for the very readers that supported them for years.

    Seattle Post-Intelligencer, are you guys really that chicken shit to not cover this?

  5. We also are getting the Times after repeated calls to stop after the PI ceased publication.
    My guess is that they will continue to bill and I’ll have to take more time later to contest the bill.
    read my lips: STOP DELIVERING THE PAPER PER MY PREVIOUS INSTRUCTIONS!!!

  6. I canceled the paper immediately after the PI stopped publication. They gave me a free Times the day after, with a pleading note to continue my subscription, then I got another free one the next Sunday, but I haven’t gotten one since. They haven’t refunded me my subscription money, though.

  8. This is TOTAL bullshit!

    1. This is obviously an illegal practice.
    2. The newspaper will only let you start (not STOP) a subscription online (in the interest of evading customers).
    3. They refuse to stop delivering the Times. (I’ve called twice.)

    When do we get to elect an attorney general that has some stones?

  11. I quit subscribing in 2001 after the daily newspaper publishers screwed their employees and forced them out on strike. The Times will be gone soon.

  14. Meh. I guess really expected Hearst to send me $16 or whatever my balance was when they stopped printing Seattle’s 147 year old paper. I mean they kind of showed their colors.

    As for the Seattle Times that started showing up on my doorstep… I guess I don’t mind taking a look through it now and then and the newsprint is handy for lining my now meat containing compost bin.

    Especially since it’s free.

  15. Kip Only an idiot would take the time to post that he doesn’t care…So how do you pay for your big house and your cars and your place on vashon if you are so poor…oh I forgot, you do it by stealing peoples deposits and by not paying your bills. Poor, poor Kip…

  16. “it’s certainly not comforting to know that the State’s leading law enforcement official isn’t too keen on upholding the law in the most obvious case. The Seattle Times’ plan is a crystal clear violation of Washington State Law regarding unsolicited goods.”

    Selective law enforcement is the way it works in this state, especially in Seattle. And thats the way we like it, uh huh.

  17. I called immediately and was livid. The guy at the Times who took my call was amused. I think he put me on speaker phone. I told him “I subscribed to the PI. If you can’t deliver the PI then give me my money back.” He said he would. I still don’t have a refund and occasionally I spot a paper on my walkway. My neighbor takes them. I STILL DON’T HAVE A REFUND!

    After reading this, I’ve decided to file a complaint with the Better Business Bureau and the Attorney General. I am hoping that there is a lawyer reading this who will think about a lawsuit for the 100,000 plus PI subscribers.

Comments are closed.