> Is priced content worse than the current situation, where services are monetized exclusively by essentially running malware on the user's machine?

You're conflating two things: the revenue model for publishers and ISPs cutting off access to services which do not sign an agreement with them. The fee ISPs charge, you can take as read would not go towards subsidizing independent content.

But then you just choose an ISP that doesn't do such dastardly deals. It might cost more, but that's your choice.

In the US, one's choices are often (1) ISP A, (2) no internet.

Do you not have cable as well as the phone system? Do you not have sewers a competitor could run fibre through? Do you not have unlicensed p2p wireless?

Those are two separate things. OP is talking about the pipe being monetized. That is an extra charge we will pay just to get to the sites that then monetize via ads or gathering our data.

My point is that there might be kickbacks from pipe operator to content mill.