That's not how human rights (usually and also in this case) work. You yourself are responsible for getting internet access. Newspapers that don't pay their bil

That's not how human rights (usually and also in this case) work. You yourself are responsible for getting internet access. Newspapers that don't pay their bills have no right to be bailed out. One reason for this is that freedom of speech and freedom of press are negative rights: the government is not allowed to stop you from publishing your newspapers but they also don't have to provide you with the means for publishing newspapers[#]. That's your own responsibility. The second and related reason is that private entities like companies or people are (usually) not limited by human rights. Those rights (usually) protect people from the government, not from each other. A journalist can't sue her editor for not allowing her to publish an article. (Well, she can sue but wouldn't win.) Only governments have to respect human rights. (Again, usually.) [#] As always, plenty of funny and interesting edge cases are worth discussing. What if the government bans paper? Or requires all print products to be printed on super-expensive paper that's not economical for newspapers?