Thanks. It’s funny you mention cost because MOST news sites have implemented the cheapest, laziest paywall technology - which reflects their cheap/lazy mindset but also their arrogance.
Using browser extensions that block JavaScript, manage/delete cookies and/or block ads, most paywalls are easily defeated and/or the silly ‘free article limit’ and incessant popups moaning about adblocking or subscribing can be wrangled. It’s not uncommon to see the adblock counter tick over 60+ ads (and trackers, beacons, etc.) on a single page!
For better or worse, some paywalls actually work, notably the Wall Street Journal which wages a constant war against Google backdoor access, Facebook access, URL spoofing, etc. It’s fairly airtight...they’ve even started blocking Outline.com.
“t’s funny you mention cost because MOST news sites have implemented the cheapest, laziest paywall technology - which reflects their cheap/lazy mindset but also their arrogance.”
i think a lot of these outlets want the leakage because otherwise if they were 100% behind 100% effective paywalls, then they’d be so cut off from the rest of the world they’d simply shrivel up and die because their product is so useless or redundant that very few are willing to pay for it and even fewer advertisers are willing to pay to have their ads 100% behind effective paywalls
only a couple of outlets like the WSJ can afford to cut themselves off completely except for paying customers, and quite frankly i think the WSJ is gonna eventually find out that that model isn’t sustainable ...