5 ms·
Don't want people gazing on your property? Erect a fence. Nothing prevents media sites from implementing access controls to only allow paying customers.
by kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
Don't want people gazing on your property? Erect a fence. Nothing prevents media sites from implementing access controls to only allow paying customers.
- pyrale 3y agoThat's a classic case of prisoner's dilemma though. By acting at national level, news publishers (partially) avoid that dilemma.
- tsimionescu 3y agoDon't want people stepping on your property? Shoot them down, why bother calling the police!
- HDThoreaun 3y agoNo one pays. Journalism is a public good that will not exist if the current status quo continues. It’s in societies interest to ensure that doesn’t happen but everyone wants to free ride
- int_19h 3y agoIf no-one pays, then society as a whole clearly disagrees that it is a public good. Or, at least, that it is a public good worth the expense.
- revelio 3y agoThere are plenty of news websites with paywalls, it's common amongst conservative media. It's primarily the left wing media that thinks the government should tax tech firms instead of newspapers being required to charge customers.
- gbear605 3y ago…what? I’m not familiar with Canadian papers, but at least with American news sources most of the national newspapers have paywalls regardless of ideology (NYT, Washington Post, Financial Times, Wall Street Journal), while television news (CNN, Fox, NBC, ABC) and right-wing sources tend to be ad supported (Breitbart, New York Post), and more left-wing sources usually tend to be some form of donation funded (Jacobin, Mother Jones). If this were passed in the US, the big winners would be right-wing sources and the television news networks.