Quality journalism costs money. Period.
Sometimes it's ads, sometimes it's asking for an email address, sometimes it requires a subscription. The bottom line is good reporting is not free.
There's also a million and one ways to bypass most paywalls that require very little effort (assuming you bother to put forth that minimum effort rather than whining "PaYWaLLEd!" in the comments). Sometimes it's just a soft paywall (daily article limits, regional locking, etc), but some people still can't help but whine about it and demand you accommodate them (while refusing to put forth any effort to obtain the information themselves).
"Just post an archive link instead" I often hear.
That's a terrible solution (and Lemmy UI's worst feature), and here's why:
Astronauts Land on Moon: Discover It Really IS made of cheese
Source: archive.ph/abcdefg
Just scrolling through your feed: Is that headline from a reputable source or some trash tabloid, troll farm, or crazy person's blog?
Should it be believed, taken seriously, or given more than 1/2 second thought? Is it even worth clicking into the article at all?
It's absolutely impossible to tell because its source is obfuscated with an archive.ph link which tells you nothing about where the headline comes from.
People scroll and just absorb headlines as fact, adding that little tidbit of information to their collective knowledge. I do it, you do it, we all do it. I get it: we're busy with lives and can't read every article that gets posted. I'm not shaming the practice.
Having the canonical source of news headlines apparent goes a long way to combating misinformation by giving context to the headline's credibility, letting you know where the information is coming from, and what, if any, agenda it may be pushing. Obfuscating the sources removes all of those protections in a "trust me, bro, this is legit" kind of way.
It should not be on the poster to accommodate everyone's tinfoil-hat reasons. If they prefer an alternate source, that is 100% on them to deal with.
PS: For those of you posting quality news with the official links and not kowtowing to the "pAyWAllEd!" crowd, I thank and salute you.
You can 100% eliminate those comments by indicating that what you are posting is paywalled.
It’s irritating to your readers to see a headline they want more info on, click, and get 2 sentences of it then get blocked. A “pay walled” comment is frustration, and frustration comes from unmet expectations.
Nobody is going to read the first half paragraph of something they found in All and then go “man I should subscribe so I can see what this is all about”.
Your call for a ban is certainly the part that makes it an unpopular opinion though. That’s an excellent way to drive away the small part of the user base that even bothers to comment, and would be counterproductive to the growth of Lemmy as a platform.
Exactly this. I comment it because the post sounds interesting, you want us to know more, and then I can't see it. This is an aggregation site. It aggregates many news sources. I subscribe to a regular one, yeah, I pay for one, but I'm not going to pay for all of them just because it gets posted here.
If you want to post it to an aggregation site the least that can be done is to throw a [Paywall] tag on it.
And agree on the ban part. What a tiny thing to ban someone over. Down vote is appropriate of you disagree, that's what it's there for. A ban is way way way too intense. It is not on par with hate content.