There is a serious issue with entitlement that all entertainment should be free. Of course, this is a multifaceted issue that was started because of the greed of the music/film/book industries at the dawning of the 2000s, where people just flat out got tired being price gouged for shit, but there is also a newer generation that grew up thinking piracy was where it was at, because said industries snatched physical copies away as the norm so they don't understand the value of ownership, therefore they have zero value in paying. But being fair, America has oversubscriptioned itself to death as well, with people now getting far too comfortable leasing their entertainment than demanding ownership of copies purchased.
This issue isn't just with paywalls. Writers tend to price their books at an ungodly amount like .99cents for a full length book to attract readers. That creates an unrealistic standard that all books should be priced so cheap. Then there's Amazon with the free books via Kindle Unlimited paying you a millionth of a cent per page read based on time spent on said page - it's just all fucked up. I cannot tell you how much shit I got for insisting the publisher price my first novel at 16 bucks in 2021 when the average indie was pricing at 5-7 bucks for a 60-80K softback novel (which was more than a fucking pocket paperback in the 90s half its size) and told "nobody's going to buy that because it cost too much". I also got shit for not having ebooks available, because people thought those would be cheaper as many do price their ebooks cheap as hell but yet were shit faced when Zuckerberg pirated those 9 million books and really ain't paying everybody because "copyright", since now the government is picking/choosing how that works. As I said in my last OpEd, Amazon can choose to raise or drop the price set on the books at THEIR DISCRETION and fuck you for thinking you’re telling them otherwise. This can result in your book literally being halved – so imagine all the poor saps out there listing the book at .99 cents just for Amazon to make it 50% off while they take 40 percent of your .49 cents or less (which remember you still have to pay the publisher on those 70/30, 80/20, 90/10 deals), and out of that percentage you still may have to break bread with your imprint for extra shit like advances before you even get that ten cents left.
So you can just imagine the pushback I saw being forced to raise the price of my last novel to 25 bucks. Now you throw in the tariffs and the end of demimis, the lack of enforced media mail in postage and the cost has went up considerably just for people to purchase, but before we even got to that, people are willing to go to Starbucks and spend 20 bucks on 2 drinks but not a book.
I must say though, this is really an American problem because 95% of all of my sales are always overseas where they don't mind buying good books and no one scoffs at a book price like they do in America. Then again, America thrives on now over subscription, giving people millions of songs and books for ten bucks a month. Very hard for people to part with money for one item when they are getting such a over bulk deal.
A lot of good points here. That said, I wish it would be visually obvious to the reader whether a substack post was paywalled or not before we clicked on it.
That confusion is no doubt intentional, so that we can be teased with part of the post in the hopes we'll start yet another unending subscription (instead of buying that particular post) but I don't like it.
Now, linking to an external article that's behind a paywall... I can see why some people would hate that. But in my mind, it's because most links aren't paywalled.
The expectation that "everything should be free" is the original sin of the internet. Nothing is free, and we've got the freeloaders to thank for basic websites being unusuably covered in retina-raping pop-up ads.
Yes. Subscriptions (with autorenew) rub a lot of people the wrong way and they’re not wrong to feel that way. So offering straightforward, one-time purchases is important to respect people’s spending decisions. I hope you love the book!
'The commenters who agreed with Alex mentioned on multiple occasions that a disclaimerless paywall was “rude” and “wasting their time.” - Funny, those people are wasting the author's time. If they're not willing to pay for content then why should the creator give them a second thought?
I can’t believe how many people get into this who piracy/everything should be free crowd.
To me, I’ll have most of my stuff here for free — you want to know what I think of the story of different books, comics, a games — I’m your guy.
And while you’re at it, feel free to get involved in my game.
Or read my book Webtastic Stories: Fear and Loathing on the Internet. It’s free, and you’ll laugh your head off as I talk about some of the insanity of the Internet — I actually offer that for free as a public service!
I should write a blog about why again. Go straight to what happened with Charlie Kirk, he died because stupid internet people thought he was the enemy and murdered him because they didn’t like his words. All praise the Algorithm!
But come next year, I’m going to start to offer courses on world building here on Substack. I’d like to say I’m an expert, working on a game world for over 6 years — how to design a world from physical aspects, historical aspects, cultural aspects, daily life aspects, and fantastical aspects.
Offer 5 blogs — talking about each part of each aspect with a few questions — that’s free.
Offer another 4 blogs on how to take that and create a setting in the Fame system — also free.
Offer the 20-30 blogs that go into each part of each aspect under a paywall — all with great examples of each aspect and more than a dozen questions for each — that’s worth $5/month!
The main reason I'm not a subscriber for, well, anything, is I spent too long chronically unemployed. (This isn't to argue against any of your points. I'm just sharing another perspective.) Though I have an income now, I've still been wired to not waste money, and subscriptions become wasteful if you're not using them enough. I prefer to purchase the specific thing I'm interested in, that way I have what I want, and it cannot go away due to failure for payment or the service removing it.
That is as a customer though. As a creator, I'm not sure. I have no intention of making my Substack or YouTube videos require payment, and would prefer to avoid ads, but that just goes to your point about the funnel. The novels, maybe I should charge more than I do. Currently I just do $3 for the ebook and target $15 for the paperback, because I don't think my work deserves a higher price. I have some ideas that might be special enough to call for it, but generally, I'm not wired to think that way.
Just in case it needs to be said, despite those years of unemployment, I never turned to piracy. If I wanted something, large or small, I would just decide if it was worth using my savings that way. If it was, purchased. If not, no sale and I moved on. (This mental wiring stays handy after getting an income.)
If your opinion is valid, it'll stand on its own. When people like Rusty try to reinforce their argument with "bestseller" status, they've already lost. Bestseller status is not the flex they think it is, even less so these days. Now, all you have to do is get ten authors together, put your novels into one book, promote the hell out of it, each buy a bunch of copies, and voilà, you hit a random bestseller list in an obscure category. Truth be told, the VAST majority of these authors are only 1/10th bestsellers. They're the Elizabeth Warren of bestsellers, yet they act like they're on a level with James Patterson.
Furthermore, those who proclaim "bestseller" status the loudest are not making a living as writers. This is probably why they're stuck in the "freebie" mindset. Somewhere along the way, they've been brainwashed into thinking the only way to be successful is to give their work away, and they resent anyone who values themselves and their work enough to demand just compensation.
As for the "pimp" argument, that was just nonsensical. The last I checked; a paywall didn't slap you when you backtalked it.
Dude…yes! All of this. I wanna drop my two cents since everyone and their mom got some say here.
Whatever happened to just changing the channel? I never had to announce to everyone when I was watching a program I didn’t want to. I just turned the channel and my life was unharmed because of it.
If you’re gonna block someone, Alex, just block them. You’re not winning any awards for cracking this case wide open with Scooby-Doo and the gang. You’re not providing any REAL VALUE in posting your brain dead take on paywalls and disclaimers.
If you don’t like what you see, just move along. Instead of just clicking three times and bouncing, you (Alex) have decided to make a mountain out of…no, scratch that, it’s not even a mole hill. It’s like stubbing your toe on a pebble. It’s so minuscule that crying about it makes you look silly.
Great article, Kristin. Keep up the great work and ignore the silly goats hanging around our biz. Haha
Building up a following before offering paid options is a solid strategy. So focus on building and then roll out with a paid offer. I think you’ll be surprised
Paywalls can be annoying. But I can't say that I've ever thrown a blocking tantrum over one. Close the tab and move on. It's not that hard.
Thank you for taking on some of these entitled people. It's unlikely that you'll ever change their minds, but someone else who stumbles across the conversation may take your words to heart.
Why do creatives have to apologize for making money when nobody else does? I can't recall the last time my garbage collector said, "So sorry for taking a salary. I wish I could pick up your crap for free."
Wow, this lady just looks to be offended. Dude, you open it, shrug, and go away. That's it. I find it annoying too, especially when I'm trying to get info for a video essay, but this is just anger for anger's sake. She needs to point that energy somewhere useful lol
I'm a reader who respects your intentions, thought and courage, Kristin. I will pay for well-researched and well-developed work that advances my interests and I'll pay at reasonable market prices both because that's fair and it's what I can afford. (In fact, I bought a title of yours not long ago.)
You could absolutely argue to me that an indie title ought to charge above market odds because it's indie, niche and of low distribution. As someone who also buys academic titles, I would understand that argument right away. (I'd also reply that this is a quality argument: you need to produce quality *above* mass-market when you do that and not just rush poor production out the door.)
I also make some purchases within the commerce of social media because I think the conversation matters and not just the product -- in fact, part of what makes writing valuable is that it's part of a continuing conversation. The opportunity to talk to thoughtful people with emerging ideas is literally the only attraction of social media for me. At its best it's electronic 18th century coffeehouse culture.
But notwithstanding all that, I will never join your cult.
That it pokes fun at left-wing cultishness is laudable, but that doesn't stop crowd-sourcing 'true fans' from also being a cult-seeking behaviour.
And my rejection of that is not you, it's me.
I can't think of any writer whose cult I ever would join. The are writers whose work I have enjoyed enough to buy a title in a series sight unseen, but if they switched mode from (say) novel to essay, then I'd still re-evaluate the purchase. If they started a podcast then I don't want to subsidise the podcast unless I'm going to listen to it. If they published an album of music then I'd evaluate that separately, in its own right.
The reason I pay for fiction or nonfiction in the first place is that my time is more valuable than my money. Money spent buying writing helps me use my time better: it's that simple. So title by title, a transaction makes sense, but anyone who wants a subscription from me needs to value my time and not exploit it with 'content', creating noise in lieu of insight. This is why subscriptions work well for journalists; less well for authors.
The current commercial arrangements for writers are maddeningly bad, and I appreciate that you're trying to find a way through. Part of that has to be rethinking the problem, and that's what you're attempting.
You're also arguing for more than one thing, and I agree with some of it: pump the prices, focus on your real market. (I'd also say, target the titles better and improve the quality rather than rushing, but that's a separate conversation.)
But seeking the 'true fans' path actually changes the job of the writer, changes the product being sold and alters its value proposition. I think that has two problems:
1. You're incrementally turning the writer into a live entertainer. That too is a noble avocation, but the skills you need to write do not translate into live entertainment skills and vice-versa. Writing is already time-consuming and this is working multiple jobs.
2. Critically, you're not doing it because live entertainment enhances the writing as an end product. You're doing it to crowdsource patronage for the personality rather than promote commerce in the written word.
And that's cult-like behaviour. You're not doing it because it's good for the writing; you're doing it because you can't presently find another way to work in this market than to crowdsource rusted-on patronage.
So what does that do to the value?
I love certain writers, but I reserve the right to dislike some of their titles and disagree with some of their ideas. More than a right; it's part of the *point* of writing -- you get time to weigh and consider; to break ideas up, to accept parts and reject others.
And me disliking a title doesn't make the next title better or worse. The writer has to act independently of my current reactions; otherwise they're working at my commission.
This makes the commerce of writing naturally fall into title-by-title purchase. I don't have stats but it seems intuitively obvious that most of the market who buys a title won't be 'true fans' completists who blindly buy everything. Furthermore, a large chunk of your word-of-mouth promotions and recommendations are likely to be through casual readers, and some of your most productive conversations might be with readers who generally read something else -- especially if they are also writing. So by creating an echo-chamber I don't think you're actually helping the products.
Finally -- do you really want to write on commission to your 'true fans'? Because that's what it means to have a patron. What writer wants to turn fanfic ideas into their own canon? 'True fans' aren't passive. They'll want a piece of your IP -- to shape it and own it. They have access to you while you draft and before you publish. That changes the equation.
Meanwhile, you're faking intimacy with them when what you really want is for them to pay you more for low cost stuff while you ignore them, take their cash and write the high cost stuff.
I wouldn't call it whoring, but how is it not at least a cynical bait and switch?
You'll be aware that none of this has anything to do with paywalls and disclaimers -- that was a strawman and your sympathetic 'in'. I have focused instead on the thing you want to talk about, which is the commerce. You surely already know that, but I have left this paragraph here in case some reader mistakes your opening point for your main point.
I think we should force everyone to use the word 'alleged' before describing content as either 'paywalled' or 'free.' It's all alleged since none of it was proved in court of law.
If we are gonna be stupid, let's get lawyer-level stupid.
Shall we then celebrate alexandriabrown for self-censoring herself from paid content? For those seeking to attract patronage, this is great, because our paid speech with an unavoidable profit-motivated bias, won’t attract the attention of those seeking to freeload or destroy capitalism. Getting blocked by individuals is a badge of integrity. Getting blocked by a platform is another matter.
Here for all of it Kristin.
There is a serious issue with entitlement that all entertainment should be free. Of course, this is a multifaceted issue that was started because of the greed of the music/film/book industries at the dawning of the 2000s, where people just flat out got tired being price gouged for shit, but there is also a newer generation that grew up thinking piracy was where it was at, because said industries snatched physical copies away as the norm so they don't understand the value of ownership, therefore they have zero value in paying. But being fair, America has oversubscriptioned itself to death as well, with people now getting far too comfortable leasing their entertainment than demanding ownership of copies purchased.
This issue isn't just with paywalls. Writers tend to price their books at an ungodly amount like .99cents for a full length book to attract readers. That creates an unrealistic standard that all books should be priced so cheap. Then there's Amazon with the free books via Kindle Unlimited paying you a millionth of a cent per page read based on time spent on said page - it's just all fucked up. I cannot tell you how much shit I got for insisting the publisher price my first novel at 16 bucks in 2021 when the average indie was pricing at 5-7 bucks for a 60-80K softback novel (which was more than a fucking pocket paperback in the 90s half its size) and told "nobody's going to buy that because it cost too much". I also got shit for not having ebooks available, because people thought those would be cheaper as many do price their ebooks cheap as hell but yet were shit faced when Zuckerberg pirated those 9 million books and really ain't paying everybody because "copyright", since now the government is picking/choosing how that works. As I said in my last OpEd, Amazon can choose to raise or drop the price set on the books at THEIR DISCRETION and fuck you for thinking you’re telling them otherwise. This can result in your book literally being halved – so imagine all the poor saps out there listing the book at .99 cents just for Amazon to make it 50% off while they take 40 percent of your .49 cents or less (which remember you still have to pay the publisher on those 70/30, 80/20, 90/10 deals), and out of that percentage you still may have to break bread with your imprint for extra shit like advances before you even get that ten cents left.
So you can just imagine the pushback I saw being forced to raise the price of my last novel to 25 bucks. Now you throw in the tariffs and the end of demimis, the lack of enforced media mail in postage and the cost has went up considerably just for people to purchase, but before we even got to that, people are willing to go to Starbucks and spend 20 bucks on 2 drinks but not a book.
I must say though, this is really an American problem because 95% of all of my sales are always overseas where they don't mind buying good books and no one scoffs at a book price like they do in America. Then again, America thrives on now over subscription, giving people millions of songs and books for ten bucks a month. Very hard for people to part with money for one item when they are getting such a over bulk deal.
Of course that is by design too.
It's a mess!
A lot of good points here. That said, I wish it would be visually obvious to the reader whether a substack post was paywalled or not before we clicked on it.
That confusion is no doubt intentional, so that we can be teased with part of the post in the hopes we'll start yet another unending subscription (instead of buying that particular post) but I don't like it.
Now, linking to an external article that's behind a paywall... I can see why some people would hate that. But in my mind, it's because most links aren't paywalled.
The expectation that "everything should be free" is the original sin of the internet. Nothing is free, and we've got the freeloaders to thank for basic websites being unusuably covered in retina-raping pop-up ads.
Exactly! “I hate ads!” Me too. If users paid $2/month, we can get rid of ads. “Why are you grifting?? I’m not paying for this!”
Indeed; YouTube premium is totally worth it (to me).
Also, I'd rather buy your new book (I did, haven't read it yet) for $10 than subscribe for two months.
I don't like buying access. And it's possible that the Substack subscription model doesn't scale that well; our budgets don't.
You are wisely diversifying the ways you can make money. Much better than putting all your eggs in one basket.
Yes. Subscriptions (with autorenew) rub a lot of people the wrong way and they’re not wrong to feel that way. So offering straightforward, one-time purchases is important to respect people’s spending decisions. I hope you love the book!
I do appreciate in my inbox at least there is a little 🔒 icon indicating it’s a paid post.
'The commenters who agreed with Alex mentioned on multiple occasions that a disclaimerless paywall was “rude” and “wasting their time.” - Funny, those people are wasting the author's time. If they're not willing to pay for content then why should the creator give them a second thought?
Exactly!! They’re very confused about who is imposing on who
I totally agree here.
I can’t believe how many people get into this who piracy/everything should be free crowd.
To me, I’ll have most of my stuff here for free — you want to know what I think of the story of different books, comics, a games — I’m your guy.
And while you’re at it, feel free to get involved in my game.
Or read my book Webtastic Stories: Fear and Loathing on the Internet. It’s free, and you’ll laugh your head off as I talk about some of the insanity of the Internet — I actually offer that for free as a public service!
I should write a blog about why again. Go straight to what happened with Charlie Kirk, he died because stupid internet people thought he was the enemy and murdered him because they didn’t like his words. All praise the Algorithm!
But come next year, I’m going to start to offer courses on world building here on Substack. I’d like to say I’m an expert, working on a game world for over 6 years — how to design a world from physical aspects, historical aspects, cultural aspects, daily life aspects, and fantastical aspects.
Offer 5 blogs — talking about each part of each aspect with a few questions — that’s free.
Offer another 4 blogs on how to take that and create a setting in the Fame system — also free.
Offer the 20-30 blogs that go into each part of each aspect under a paywall — all with great examples of each aspect and more than a dozen questions for each — that’s worth $5/month!
Broke and entitled is a bad way to go through life. Yikes to them all
The main reason I'm not a subscriber for, well, anything, is I spent too long chronically unemployed. (This isn't to argue against any of your points. I'm just sharing another perspective.) Though I have an income now, I've still been wired to not waste money, and subscriptions become wasteful if you're not using them enough. I prefer to purchase the specific thing I'm interested in, that way I have what I want, and it cannot go away due to failure for payment or the service removing it.
That is as a customer though. As a creator, I'm not sure. I have no intention of making my Substack or YouTube videos require payment, and would prefer to avoid ads, but that just goes to your point about the funnel. The novels, maybe I should charge more than I do. Currently I just do $3 for the ebook and target $15 for the paperback, because I don't think my work deserves a higher price. I have some ideas that might be special enough to call for it, but generally, I'm not wired to think that way.
Just in case it needs to be said, despite those years of unemployment, I never turned to piracy. If I wanted something, large or small, I would just decide if it was worth using my savings that way. If it was, purchased. If not, no sale and I moved on. (This mental wiring stays handy after getting an income.)
If your opinion is valid, it'll stand on its own. When people like Rusty try to reinforce their argument with "bestseller" status, they've already lost. Bestseller status is not the flex they think it is, even less so these days. Now, all you have to do is get ten authors together, put your novels into one book, promote the hell out of it, each buy a bunch of copies, and voilà, you hit a random bestseller list in an obscure category. Truth be told, the VAST majority of these authors are only 1/10th bestsellers. They're the Elizabeth Warren of bestsellers, yet they act like they're on a level with James Patterson.
Furthermore, those who proclaim "bestseller" status the loudest are not making a living as writers. This is probably why they're stuck in the "freebie" mindset. Somewhere along the way, they've been brainwashed into thinking the only way to be successful is to give their work away, and they resent anyone who values themselves and their work enough to demand just compensation.
As for the "pimp" argument, that was just nonsensical. The last I checked; a paywall didn't slap you when you backtalked it.
Very true! Though I don’t want to discount anyone’s sales there are gradations to the “best seller” status these days
Dude…yes! All of this. I wanna drop my two cents since everyone and their mom got some say here.
Whatever happened to just changing the channel? I never had to announce to everyone when I was watching a program I didn’t want to. I just turned the channel and my life was unharmed because of it.
If you’re gonna block someone, Alex, just block them. You’re not winning any awards for cracking this case wide open with Scooby-Doo and the gang. You’re not providing any REAL VALUE in posting your brain dead take on paywalls and disclaimers.
If you don’t like what you see, just move along. Instead of just clicking three times and bouncing, you (Alex) have decided to make a mountain out of…no, scratch that, it’s not even a mole hill. It’s like stubbing your toe on a pebble. It’s so minuscule that crying about it makes you look silly.
Great article, Kristin. Keep up the great work and ignore the silly goats hanging around our biz. Haha
And here I am, throwing my stuff out there for free hoping someone will notice. Paid subs are a far reaching fantasy for me 😅... and that sucks.
Building up a following before offering paid options is a solid strategy. So focus on building and then roll out with a paid offer. I think you’ll be surprised
Paywalls can be annoying. But I can't say that I've ever thrown a blocking tantrum over one. Close the tab and move on. It's not that hard.
Thank you for taking on some of these entitled people. It's unlikely that you'll ever change their minds, but someone else who stumbles across the conversation may take your words to heart.
Why do creatives have to apologize for making money when nobody else does? I can't recall the last time my garbage collector said, "So sorry for taking a salary. I wish I could pick up your crap for free."
Weird. I don't like her already.
So, are we all supposed to work for free?
Freaking communists.
Those same people ruined music too.
Wow, this lady just looks to be offended. Dude, you open it, shrug, and go away. That's it. I find it annoying too, especially when I'm trying to get info for a video essay, but this is just anger for anger's sake. She needs to point that energy somewhere useful lol
I'm a reader who respects your intentions, thought and courage, Kristin. I will pay for well-researched and well-developed work that advances my interests and I'll pay at reasonable market prices both because that's fair and it's what I can afford. (In fact, I bought a title of yours not long ago.)
You could absolutely argue to me that an indie title ought to charge above market odds because it's indie, niche and of low distribution. As someone who also buys academic titles, I would understand that argument right away. (I'd also reply that this is a quality argument: you need to produce quality *above* mass-market when you do that and not just rush poor production out the door.)
I also make some purchases within the commerce of social media because I think the conversation matters and not just the product -- in fact, part of what makes writing valuable is that it's part of a continuing conversation. The opportunity to talk to thoughtful people with emerging ideas is literally the only attraction of social media for me. At its best it's electronic 18th century coffeehouse culture.
But notwithstanding all that, I will never join your cult.
That it pokes fun at left-wing cultishness is laudable, but that doesn't stop crowd-sourcing 'true fans' from also being a cult-seeking behaviour.
And my rejection of that is not you, it's me.
I can't think of any writer whose cult I ever would join. The are writers whose work I have enjoyed enough to buy a title in a series sight unseen, but if they switched mode from (say) novel to essay, then I'd still re-evaluate the purchase. If they started a podcast then I don't want to subsidise the podcast unless I'm going to listen to it. If they published an album of music then I'd evaluate that separately, in its own right.
The reason I pay for fiction or nonfiction in the first place is that my time is more valuable than my money. Money spent buying writing helps me use my time better: it's that simple. So title by title, a transaction makes sense, but anyone who wants a subscription from me needs to value my time and not exploit it with 'content', creating noise in lieu of insight. This is why subscriptions work well for journalists; less well for authors.
The current commercial arrangements for writers are maddeningly bad, and I appreciate that you're trying to find a way through. Part of that has to be rethinking the problem, and that's what you're attempting.
You're also arguing for more than one thing, and I agree with some of it: pump the prices, focus on your real market. (I'd also say, target the titles better and improve the quality rather than rushing, but that's a separate conversation.)
But seeking the 'true fans' path actually changes the job of the writer, changes the product being sold and alters its value proposition. I think that has two problems:
1. You're incrementally turning the writer into a live entertainer. That too is a noble avocation, but the skills you need to write do not translate into live entertainment skills and vice-versa. Writing is already time-consuming and this is working multiple jobs.
2. Critically, you're not doing it because live entertainment enhances the writing as an end product. You're doing it to crowdsource patronage for the personality rather than promote commerce in the written word.
And that's cult-like behaviour. You're not doing it because it's good for the writing; you're doing it because you can't presently find another way to work in this market than to crowdsource rusted-on patronage.
So what does that do to the value?
I love certain writers, but I reserve the right to dislike some of their titles and disagree with some of their ideas. More than a right; it's part of the *point* of writing -- you get time to weigh and consider; to break ideas up, to accept parts and reject others.
And me disliking a title doesn't make the next title better or worse. The writer has to act independently of my current reactions; otherwise they're working at my commission.
This makes the commerce of writing naturally fall into title-by-title purchase. I don't have stats but it seems intuitively obvious that most of the market who buys a title won't be 'true fans' completists who blindly buy everything. Furthermore, a large chunk of your word-of-mouth promotions and recommendations are likely to be through casual readers, and some of your most productive conversations might be with readers who generally read something else -- especially if they are also writing. So by creating an echo-chamber I don't think you're actually helping the products.
Finally -- do you really want to write on commission to your 'true fans'? Because that's what it means to have a patron. What writer wants to turn fanfic ideas into their own canon? 'True fans' aren't passive. They'll want a piece of your IP -- to shape it and own it. They have access to you while you draft and before you publish. That changes the equation.
Meanwhile, you're faking intimacy with them when what you really want is for them to pay you more for low cost stuff while you ignore them, take their cash and write the high cost stuff.
I wouldn't call it whoring, but how is it not at least a cynical bait and switch?
You'll be aware that none of this has anything to do with paywalls and disclaimers -- that was a strawman and your sympathetic 'in'. I have focused instead on the thing you want to talk about, which is the commerce. You surely already know that, but I have left this paragraph here in case some reader mistakes your opening point for your main point.
I hope this may be useful.
I think we should force everyone to use the word 'alleged' before describing content as either 'paywalled' or 'free.' It's all alleged since none of it was proved in court of law.
If we are gonna be stupid, let's get lawyer-level stupid.
Shall we then celebrate alexandriabrown for self-censoring herself from paid content? For those seeking to attract patronage, this is great, because our paid speech with an unavoidable profit-motivated bias, won’t attract the attention of those seeking to freeload or destroy capitalism. Getting blocked by individuals is a badge of integrity. Getting blocked by a platform is another matter.
Eh, it depends on the platform.