I don't disagree, but ideally quality journalism should be treated as a public good, as it's, well, a source of information about the world, an extention of education, you could say

A lot of European countries have tax-supported independent news organizations

Publicly funded news corporations with journalistic freedom would be nice

We just read free fearmongering content on right wing extremist websites instead, duh

This article is reposted. Or mirrored or whatever.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/these-cheap-loans-are-becoming-a-hit-with-home-buyers-but-there-are-catches/ar-BB1qJ72W

I'd rather fund quality original news none-for-profit. But all major news articles are in it for the money. How do you expect me to pay for something that has a vested interest in making money off the stuff they report?

I am fine paying for news. My main problem is these newspapers use manipulation to spread their news. They use cookies to limit the number of articles you can read. This allows people that can see the article thinking everyone else can. Also the entire article can be read by search engines. So when people are searching for certain info, the find the article and they are paywalled. It's a major waste of time. Just don't allow those articles to be searched then.

On top of all that the offers the give are introductory. They will have a signifcant jump afterwards. They will hound you to resubscribe and sell your information for as much as they legally (usually) can.

As much as I hate them, ads. The same newspapers have always made money. Along with the Wikipedia route of asking for donations