also feel free to comment your own suggestions for news sites for tech updates that don’t pay wall on the web page.
New York times - https://www.nytimes.com/section/technology abc - https://abcnews.go.com/technology
the hill - https://thehill.com/policy/technology/ BBC news - https://www.bbc.com/news/technology
while nonprofit Npr doesn’t pay wall, they have a new pop up that says something along the likes of “expected a paywall not our style please donate” that the user can dismiss and continue browsing the site. https://www.npr.org/sections/technology/
Reuters use to be a good source for me untill they started pay walling after a small amount of news article reads.
I don’t want to comment on entitlement because we’re not all in the same place financially.
However it IS important to support good journalism and some nicer models are funding through taxes (public broadcasters) or subscriptions. Subscriptions aren’t necessarily individual, and some are for through local libraries and universities.
Good journalism costs money, and it’s one of the only things that give us a fighting chance towards fixing the problems around us. If news agencies run out of funding, then they switch to other models, or worse they get sold to some corporation and the coverage is controlled.
What you can do, depending on where you are in life:
Piracy / filter blockers will be around, so if all else fails just read the stories to learn and grow as a person. You can contribute and advocate someday
Stupid question, but does that generate any benefit for the platform even if you don’t click the ads?
Even if I see an ad for something I’m interested in, I’ll act on that by looking the item in question up on a search engine or YouTube or something - never by clicking the ad, as that’s always felt like risky browsing behavior in terms of opening the doors to malware.
Fair question, I think it depends
Sites also have control over the types of ads they show, so sites with harmful ads should be blocked anyways