You're correct that visiting the page does impose an infinitesimal marginal cost. The economics would remain the same, however, if there were no cost at all for

You're correct that visiting the page does impose an infinitesimal marginal cost. The economics would remain the same, however, if there were no cost at all for viewing the site. The content still costs money to produce. The real issue here is the denial of revenue, which as I said flows logically from nullifying the business model. Ars wants people to think that they are in the business of reporting tech news, when in fact they are in the business of selling individuals to advertisers. I don't see any notices on Ars explicitly asking people to view ads in exchange for viewing content. The reason is that doing so would confront people with the reality of the site and turn them off, even though many of them understand the ad model in principle. And yes, a newspaper full of ads is also pretending to be free. If Ars won't explicitly require their users to view ads, then they can hardly complain when people skip them. I have no sympathy.