Sign up for the daily CJR newsletter.
When a reader subscribes to a news outlet, they gain access to more than novel information and ideas—they join a dialogue. In this way, media subscriptions are essential to being an informed, active member of the community. One might even say they’re a civic right. Yet media subscriptions are a luxury in this country. In the past year, just 17 percent of Americans paid or donated to read the news, according to a Pew survey published in June. The people who do pay for access to news are sharply delineated by class: 8 percent of individuals with lower incomes pay for subscriptions, compared with 30 percent of upper-income individuals.
Cost is a major reason why people do not subscribe to news outlets. Because fewer lower-income Americans pay for news, paywalls—which 74 percent of US news consumers regularly encounter—lower the odds that they will get high-quality news. Paywalls also tend to alter what news is produced, skewing content toward the better-off. The lack of wider access limits the media’s ability to reach citizens and hold power to account, exacerbating the culture wars and even putting democracy at risk. Rodney Benson, a professor of media, culture, and communication at New York University, told Axios in 2022 that media targeting of only the highest earners “relegates everyone else to local TV news (still among the highest watched forms of news) and the most sensationalistic, and often extreme partisan, news that continues to circulate for free on the internet and through social media.”
The recent demise of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and funding for public media has made an already urgent problem much worse. Without a government commitment, journalists need new ways to deliver more news to more people. Alberto Ibargüen, the former president and CEO of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, has advocated for a change of business model. “It’s not simply a question of funding. It’s a question of a model that can sustain local news,” he said in a 2023 interview.
One idea is a readership assistance program that offers free or subsidized digital subscriptions for readers who can’t afford the full cost of a subscription. For many Americans today, a $60 Newsweek or $360 Boston Globe annual digital subscription is out of reach. A few major outlets such as The Hill or NPR are free. Yet a substantial part of the value in the diversity of media is choice. The Hill, which focuses on national politics, and the Morning Call, a newspaper covering the Lehigh Valley in Pennsylvania, are different in voice and coverage. The same is the case for NPR and the New Republic, or any other publication.
For the 76 percent of leading newspapers that rely on some form of online paywall to stay in business, readership assistance programs are the only way to ensure that the publication reaches readers of all income levels. What else might get us closer to paywall parity, wherein anyone who wants a subscription to their local newspaper or national magazine has the opportunity?
Many news outlets, such as the Wall Street Journal and New York Times, already offer discounted subscription rates to students and to those in the military. For those two groups in particular, it is easy to verify eligibility through a school email address or VetRewards Card. But there is not yet a simple, costless way to identify consumers by income eligibility.
The patient assistance programs used by pharmaceutical companies to give assistance to consumers who cannot pay in full for their prescription medication is one model for doing this. While the details of each program vary, applicants generally submit a W-2, pay stub, tax records, or unemployment benefits as proof of income, and doctors also sign off. Most of these programs are joint endeavors between drug companies and their in-house foundations, enabling the drugmakers to write off assistance as tax-deductible donations.
Readership assistance programs would be less complex than their pharmaceutical equivalents because they would not need to verify prescriptions in addition to income. Eligibility could be easily automated with software or with the creation of a shared verification platform. The platform could be nonpartisan and made available to all media companies for free. This is feasible and prescient, given the recent announcement by the Press Forward initiative to invest $500 million in local media. Some might worry that asking individuals to provide their household income or tax information would appear intrusive. Yet college financial aid programs and subsidized utility programs, used by millions, do the same.
If a foundation, philanthropist, or large media company provided such open-source software, readership assistance programs would bolster the financial position of news outlets. Paywalls reduce page views substantially. Subscriptions remain the biggest revenue focus for publishers, yet their growth is slowing. Given these realities, readership assistance programs are likely to boost circulation and page views, growing revenue through higher ad rates and new subscription fees. For-profit news outlets would also have the added advantage of tax benefits.
Public libraries offer digital access to many newspapers, but access is uneven: the outlets on offer will vary by city and according to the health of the library budget. Many outlets allow a few free articles to readers each month, too, but such infrequent patronage is not enough. Growing a loyal and robust readership depends on all-access subscribers, not fleeting page visitors.
Democratic countries like Denmark and Norway already directly subsidize journalism. Our government has washed its hands of this responsibility, out of thrift, the misguided political belief that media must be financially independent, or a disingenuous attempt to avoid accountability. Regardless, the bulk of the media industry currently operates behind paywalls, and we must give those who can’t cross over a meaningful opportunity to join us.
I like to think that news subscriptions make a drop-in visitor into a repeat customer. With time, readers develop a relationship to the editorial voice of a publication and its writers. It’s like being a regular at the neighborhood café or local museum; similar to these places, journalists should make news sites into destinations that are open to everyone.
Has America ever needed a media defender more than now? Help us by joining CJR today.
