Let's take the argument that news sites are public information and should not be encrypted. This argument breaks down pretty quickly if someone wants to inject

Let's take the argument that news sites are public information and should not be encrypted. This argument breaks down pretty quickly if someone wants to inject bad things into public WiFi but there is another, more subtle, problem. TLS stops a passive snooper (like GCHQ or a coffee shop) from seeing exactly what content you are reading as only the host is sent in the clear and not the full path. For example, it would be difficult to see exactly what articles I am reading on HN but trivial to see what I like to look at on BBC or The Guardian. You can build up quite a profile of someone from what they choose to read. This could be used for national "security" or advertising purposes. It can also have a chilling effect if people think twice before clicking on a controversial headline.