Nothing stealthy about it. They bought the votes and the Times could follow the money and identify both the payor and payee, if they cared and dared to do it. Any respectable newspaper could unbury the fine print as well and shine upon it the light of a feature article.
Under a provision known as “universal default,” a cardholder who pays a credit card company faithfully can still be hit with a high penalty interest rate for missing payments with another creditor. In another despicable tactic known as “double cycle billing,” a cardholder who pays $450 of a $500 balance is charged interest on the entire amount as opposed to the unpaid balance.
How pleased would Master Card be if the Times—or a more courageous and less complicit paper if the Times is unwilling—wrote a series on universal default? Would an expose' cause a change, as the Walter Reed series did?
Could that possibly be construed by Bill Keller under editorial policy to be a worthwhile goal?
State usury laws would once have precluded many of these practices, but those have been preempted by federal regulations that are increasingly designed to make banks and credit card companies happy — rather than protect consumers.
In classic blame the victim phrasing, the NYT editorial closes with the admonition that
“American consumers should think long and hard before they accept credit card offers that are too good to be true.”
Add to that staying out of pools when you can’t swim, avoiding marriage when you are unable to contemplate divorce, taking jobs with companies that don’t offer health care and reading newspapers that write down to you.
Which may or may not include the New York Times.(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
