From the Editor: Paywall journalism is a problem — subscribe to read more

This isn’t supposed to be a “hot take.”

But how many times have you tried to read a New York Times article and been obstructed by a paywall? Or were asked to buy a performative tote bag to make you seem like you’re just the kind of person who reads the Washington Post? 

Summertime savings? Pay $20 CAD for the first year and cancel any time!

Don’t want to spend on a subscription for the rest of your life? Use flimsy online paywall removers — which only work when they want to. 

Not wanting to pay a news site to get unrestricted access to information does not mean you are against paying journalists and writers for their work. It also doesn’t mean that you don’t believe in community or small-town journalism. 

Many non-profit media houses, which are often the only ones not charging unsuspecting readers for their content, might need funding the most. News that makes someone feel like they have to be financially worthy to access it presents serious problems. 

By making certain “premium” content only accessible to a small group of financially affluent consumers — who might list their subscriptions as donations on their tax returns — we are taking news away from those who need it the most. 

Adopting this ad-free reading subscription news model makes journalism a capitalist commodity. It leaves it to the hands of those who do not care to pick up the paper from their front door or think that newspapers are a thing of the past. 

Most importantly, subscription journalism serves those who would rather stay ignorant or don’t care enough to find out what’s happening in their neighbourhood. If you think that’s not your business, yes, it is. From anything that has to do with politics, parking at your local Walmart, or yet another construction project in your area, everything is everyone’s business and that is why news exists. 

Another misconception about news behind a paywall is that it is often the most reliable, high-quality form of journalism. There is a lot of credible reporting that exists and is free to access. 

Sure, having paywalls might reduce newsrooms’ reliance on advertising and make them financially viable, while reducing and restricting public participation and interest in a democracy. 

At a time when newsrooms are on a diminishing streak across the world, it’s important to realise that the need to inform should always come before the need to commodify. 

While most legacy news organizations are increasingly relying on subscriptions to boost their revenue, blocking access to “premium” or “quality” news is a disservice in the name of public interest. 

An article published by The Walrus in February stated that about 72 per cent of Canadians access news online, with 57 per cent indicating they won’t pay for news online. Only 15 per cent of the population nationwide pays for digital news. 

In 2020, many publications across the United States lowered their paywalls either partially or completely to give the public unrestricted access to critical information about the COVID-19 pandemic. 

However, in 2025, with the Online News Act still in place in Canada, it would be morally, if not ethically, sound to make information about issues that require intense coverage free for everyone.

Because every story is public service. 

“Journalism is, at its core, a public service,” Joy Mayer, director of Trusting News, a research and training project that promotes journalistic credibility, told the Columbia Journalism Review in 2021. 

“There is always going to be tension between financial sustainability and the desire to offer that service in a way that is accessible to everyone.”