Landon Block is a Political Science Junior and the Opinion Editor at Mustang News. The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Mustang Media Group.
My grandparents love to read my published articles. Even more, though, they love to share it with their friends to show how amazing their grandson is. But the last time I was published, they told me they needed a subscription to read it. When I used mine to help them read it, they voiced their concern about sharing it.
I understand the need for paywalls in journalism. Everybody wants free news, but it takes resources to support the skilled writers who produce it. Excessive paywalls means journalism can’t reach those who need it most: young people.
I’ve written for The San Diego Union-Tribune for over two years and now work as the Opinion Editor at Mustang News. I’m the type of person who will buy a subscription, download the app, and share interesting articles.
My peers are different. Some subscribe to The New York Times for their recipes and games. Maybe even the Wall Street Journal if they’re a real financial junkie. When I want to share an article I read, more often than not, my peers can’t read it. Some publications include a “share an article” feature for subscribers to send to nonsubscribers, but even those limit reach to a handful of articles a month.
This is frustrating for many reasons.
First and foremost, it means my peers aren’t reading high-quality news. Many are trying to inform themselves through social media. This is better than nothing, but can never be a substitute for institutionalized media and the checks that go into producing it.
I wrote a piece last year about the need for young people to engage with local media. I still believe in what I said, but I also acknowledge I didn’t show the full picture. Young people are disengaging with institutionalized media at concerning rates, and it is also on institutionalized media to make engaging accessible for young people.
Let’s look at the recent Los Angeles Fires. Some publications have this critical coverage available for free, while others are locked behind a paywall. I can’t in good conscience tell my friends to pay for a subscription to see if their childhood home was burned down when social media has it for free. Media is shutting out people who want to engage, but can’t justify the price given the circumstances.
Or take the Union-Tribune’s Community Voices Project. The CVP gave me a platform to spread my views as a young person and provided a reason for my peers to read. Many came to read my articles, and some stayed to engage further. When I joined the CVP, my articles were free for anyone to read. Now, they often appear behind a paywall even though I am not paid for writing them.
This brings me to my second frustration: this money is often not going where it should. I don’t get paid for these pieces. Many people are involved in publishing an article, and all deserve some compensation. Still, It is hard for me to justify to my readers why they should pay for a subscription to read an article I wrote for free.
This speaks to a broader issue: newsrooms being directed by hedge funds trying to extract as much money as possible without regard for the industry’s sustainability.
In July 2023, the Union-Tribune became one of these papers when the California Times company, who also owns the Los Angeles Times, sold it to MediaNews Group. MediaNews Group, alongside their owner Alden Global Capital, is notorious for squeezing every cent out of a paper until there’s nothing left.
This problem arises here in San Luis Obispo too. The SLO Tribune, originally founded in 1869, was acquired by McClatchy Media Company in 2006, which in turn was purchased by the hedge fund Chatham Asset Management in 2020.
This financial strategy is disheartening as a guest columnist who is suddenly facing paywalls to share work that used to be free. It’s downright devastating when it means scores of reporters and editors are losing their well-built careers in the name of “cost-saving.”
With this in mind, it becomes very hard for me to ask my broke college friends to spend their hard-earned dollars on a news subscription when I know the money is going to hedge fund vultures instead of the reporters and editors who work tirelessly to inform us.
So, where does this leave us? Paywalls add a barrier that stops people from reading the paper. Struggling newsrooms must resort to outside buyers who will bleed them dry soon but might keep them open one more day. Young people don’t read the news because they don’t want to spend their money on another subscription.
The money will eventually dry and journalism as we know it will die.
Until a reason is given, young people will not subscribe to newspapers, especially local ones. I don’t see this changing as my generation grows, as long as we have social media as a crutch to stay informed. That means we will continue to be underinformed, as will our children, while newsrooms are pushing out content for a smaller and smaller audience.
Yes, papers are justified in requiring some sort of subscription or daily limit on free articles. Free news forever isn’t sustainable. It’s not lost on me how lucky we are that Mustang News is able to produce quality journalism at no cost to the reader because of our sponsors and student-run nature. I’m also encouraged by the nonprofit business model of amazing publications like CalMatters that are thriving while providing quality news at little to no cost for most readers.
We need to charge less if we want professional newsrooms to make more money. Publications need to attract readers and earn subscriptions and donations, not give one-time clickers a reason to close the tab.