I don't recall ever seeing a newspaper lying around with ads cut out or scribbled over - which I guess is a simplistic analog of the ad-blockers and such that modern news outlets are up against. You can understand the push to maintain revenue that's needed to support quality journalism.
At the same time, as a consumer of news, print ads would not be centrally and intrusively tracking your every thought either, so the desire to block modern ads is entirely rational.
Modern advertising methods have broken the social contract that used to exist to help keep things in balance.
Have.
Practically every public library in the US (over 17,000 as of right now) currently, today, has online access to local and national newspapers.
My public library offers free online access to the following national newspapers:
Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The Atlantic (HAH!)
The Chicago Tribune
The Los Angeles Times
The New York Times
USA Today
The Wall Street Journal
They also offer access to local newspapers, print and digital magazines, foreign-language newspapers, historical newspaper archives, scientific journals, and more.
I live in a highly-populated, urban and suburban, highly-affluent region. To test and see if smaller public libraries have access these resources I went to the website of the public library system of the rural Indiana county my grandparents lived in. They have one branch serving 28,000 people in a poorer region of the country where average household income is somewhere around $48,000. They have access to newspapers, magazines, and scientific journals through the Indiana Digital Library system.
Then I went to the library of the poorest county (19,000/$22k) in the entire country and did the same thing: WV Reads provides access to all of that, too.
All for $0.00-- today.
Not "had", "have".
Support, by using, your local library.
Today publishers want an unprecedented level of restriction to solely the subscribers. News was never like this but they are trying to repaint our expectations on it for profit.