I understand why newspapers limit free access to their articles. Not only that, but I think they are right to do so.
However, perhaps the New York Times could make an exception for its 'What You Get for ...' feature. This is a series it runs in which it shows a few different properties in the US for sale at about the same price. The latest one, here, is three houses with asking prices of about $899,000. It is a great series: it is good to be reminded of the large number of charming old (and occasionally new) houses there are in America; it is often fun to see how people decorate them; and it occasionally amusing to see how horrible some are, both outside and in. I'm addicted anyway.
But surely it is really an advertising feature? - and doesn't that mean that there is a good reason to exclude it from the paywall, namely to allow more people to see the adverts?