This. Some of the news paper sites mentioned in the list do a good reporting and I subscribe to a few. Quality reporting is not cheap or easy and takes efforts. Let’s pay for quality else we would be left with click-bait, as supported and no information content news.

It seems like the current model isn't working too well. The more outlets clickbait the more they damage their brand. And people get a lot of news through Reddit and Twitter these days completely bypassing news outlets.

Where do you think the well informed people on Reddit and Twitter get their info? I'm being slightly facetious, and there's obviously independent reporting and direct witnesses to events online. But you take away the journalism organizations at the core of the system and then the influencers on twitter on reddit have nothing to inform their hot takes.

I don't know why people still think that. NYTimes is basically back to their glory days of revenue and profit, the FT is doing extremely well, etc etc.

Non paywalled news outlets will be clickbait - they are 100% dependent on advertising revenue and need to get clicks. Paywalled sites generally aren't.

Because while the "top-tier" media outlets are doing extremely well (NYTimes, WSJ, FT, etc.), everyone else is suffering. Huge numbers of media outlets have closed over the past 20 years and there are now far fewer journalists in the United States. Local newspapers that haven't closed are often operating a skeleton crew. And this trend has consequences: numerous studies have linked the decline of small, single-subject and local journalism to increases in political polarization and local corruption. (I worked at Harvard's Shorenstein Center which did much of the research.)

I do this, and am going to use this add on for the rest of them.

There's about 4 or 5 I would like to check

The problem is they are very hard to identify.

If all the best news sources are paywalled then most of the population won't have access. Not great for democracy.