Ever Wonder Why Only Liberal Websites Have A Paywall?

[Billlewis]

That's right, because the Dem party has become the party of the rich. This has been going on for a while, with virtually all of the top 10 wealthiest zip codes in America voting for Obama, Biden and Harris. Sure, right wing sites ask you to subscribe, but they don't lock you out if you refuse to sign up, or give them your email.

[Syntosi]

Gotta work on your logic there mate. If websites have a paywall then that means they need to monetize their users, presumably because they dont have unending piles of wealth. Free websites however are either big or small enough that they can self-finance or rely on ad revenue... or... they have a sponsor. Presumably a rich sponsor.

And why would a rich sponsor make sure that a website is open and free for the public? Presumably because it is pushing something that they think is worth more than the money required to keep the website open.

You should be very suspicious of any website where you dont know where the money is coming from. At least websites with up-front paywalls are more transparent and less likely to sell you as a product or manipulate you.

[DrPepper12]

If the "journalism" is free, YOU are the product!

If a product is free, it is low quality according to capitalism. Quality costs.

"Liberal" websites are HIGH QUALITY as evidenced by the cost & paywall

Capitalism further states the marketplace will REWARD brands that consistently deliver authentic, quality & reputable products.

As such any capitalist worthy of the name would understand that "liberal" sites are honest while free (conservative) sites are highly selective news aggregators from wire services that "process, package & present" news with less than authenticity as YOU are the product.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

Huh? The Wall Street Journal is right wing and doesn't allow you to read the articles unless you sub.

[Billlewis]

That's different, because they offer stock picks and other investment advice. They hate Trump anyway, haven't you heard, they keep saying the tariffs won't work, because they want their cheap maids and gardeners. WSJ is old guard republican, not MAGA.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

Tariffs won't work, but that's beside the point. If you want an echo chamber, then fine, but it's not just left wing sites is my point.

[Billlewis]

Of course they won't work for us, even though they work for every other nation that uses them.

[kavakava]

I'm not sure about the paywalls, but I remember when CNN tried the launch CNN plus. So for an extra fee, you could get told extra lies. The border is secure, and Biden's brain is firing on all 8 cylinders. The protest is mostly peaceful said the guy from CNN surrounded by a fiery inferno. I think they pulled the plug on that in about a couple days. Nobody wanted it.
And for the dork that said that tariffs don't work, almost every country in the world is using this system that doesn't work. 😂😂
I don't think the average person knew what a tarrif was until Trump started using them.

[Billlewis]

The Launch CNN Plus... wasn't that the one that was scrapped after ten days, or something?

[kavakava]

Yes it was. I want to see MSNBC Plus. "For just $25 per month, we promise to say racism and maga 32,000 times that month." "But at quick, this is a limited offer."

[slatyb]

Maybe it's because those "liberal sites" employ reporters who actually investigate and research their articles instead of just parroting the little orange man.

[Dongie]

🤣💦 "reporters" 😅

[Anpu23]

I haven't noticed this, the one that gets me is WSJ, they send me teasers then expect me to pay to see the article they just sent me! NPR doesn't have a pay wall (at least last time I checled)

[XXblack88]

I never noticed

[Dongie]

Because their subscribers are fools!

[DrPepper12]

Capitalist says what?

[LunarEclipse433]

Never noticed