The aggregation is fine. The ability to interact is not. I'm reading headlines from numerous sources, yet when going to the hyper link I"m not allowed to freely interact in a discussion without payment of a fee (subscription, whatever). Google, in the absence of the same, should require from headline sources a free feedback and forum discussion service to the public on their posted headlines, because news should not be a one sided argument.
i wonder if what you have also run-into is the power & control intent to control who talks to who about what. paid subscribers have no free speech. they must obey the site rules. they hold value to their own compliance as a sense of personal ownership, be that a right to abuse or a right to not be abused. underneath that is only 1 thing the intent and desire to make money. cultural regulation of media/news has never been a big issue when you look at how easy it is for someone to set up a free community news letter/paper and distribute it. the real issue is about ease of control & profit/expense. irony that we are late era communication news headline discussion is more closely aligned to political ideology as a vehicle of modern American culture. queue modern media profit based pyramid dictatorship ideologies of American economic capitalist extremism. should we be surprised at a knee jerk international movement of insular nationalism at a certain point through the age of communication & global culture exchange ? i don't think so. with dwindling global resources and over population with overt selfish greed and ownership of all resources... the issue is companion to the global debate around whos job it is to save the worlds population from its self. climate change is just a metaphor for that. previously it was nuclear war hope & change was never soo badly needed.
