I don't disagree, but it's hilarious because The Washington Post is one of the biggest darkness merchants there is.
allow me to buy one issue, or one story or 50 tokens or something.
But between two papers, one national broadcaster that costs me n x $100, Netflix, Spotify, supporting Amnesty and Médecins Sans Frontières, my family and my church there isn't room for everyone who want me to subscribe.
The problem with that idea is:
1) it doesn't result in a predictable revenue stream (required for good investigative journalism), and...
2) it incentives click-bait and outrage-bait more than anything else.
Yes. And as I wrote above I don't expect anyone to get rich from it if done according to how I thought it would work.
As for avoiding click bait, what blendle did was to offer refunds. I think they later reversed that policy, and I think that was the point I gave them up (also Linux magazines and other stuff I wanted to read never showed up).
Still, for someone wanting to be running a decent company, not a unicorn factory I think there is a niche:
I actively read very much, even from journalists I deeply disagree with, and I'd rather spend $2 extra a day on good writing than coffe (for instance).
In this case, Democracy Dies Behind Paywall. Adding WashingtonPost.com to my [manual] filtering process