[scottlegrand2]

I think one of the subtle problems here is all the pay walls on the more reputable news sites. Yes I know they need to make money but by closing themselves off to people unwilling to pay for their material, that increases the chance that sites like Twitter and Facebook become their only source of news. Nothing good comes from that. That's not blaming Facebook by the way.

[rblion]

What other solution do they have? Social media decimated their business model. Remember all the layoffs over the last decade?

[scottlegrand2]

IMO they need to come together and build the equivalent of Netflix for this content. I'm happy to pay $10 a month to eliminate all paywalls. I'm not happy with individual subscriptions to every newspaper and newsletter in existence. And yes I know disabling JavaScript gets around a lot of these paywalls. I'd like to just pay one fee though rather than a cheat.

[TeMPOraL]

They are in a bind. Paywalls limit their exposure. But relying on ads instead destroys their reputability. Ad-driven business model is literally why fake news exists and propagates, and why even the "reputable" outlets keep publishing clickbait and lying headlines.

[rblion]

This is very true. How do you think this problem could be fixed?

[TeMPOraL]

I don't know. The best idea I can think of today is to get rid of advertising-based business model (possibly through regulation) and have all news sites paywalled - but, and here's the trick - make money spent on news stories tax deductible, or even 100% reimbursable.

This preserves the market dynamics and keeps the government from controlling the press, while still effectively making the press government-funded, as it should be, because access to timely and accurate news is a public good.