Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it's the wrong mindset, but imo compensation is precisely why the internet stopped being like that. When people are doing things for free, there is generally a maximum to the amount of effort they will put into things. They might try to make something look nice and be slick for the end user, but they won't usually hire people or use big studios. This contributed to a culture where the very best people in the fi…
Another negative aspect of compensation I’ve thought about is that it could cause content creators, particularly political and religious/non-religious ones, from seriously exploring opposing views. Why make videos exploring opposing views when you are making thousands of dollars by giving your audience what it wants? It may increase bias, and limit the self development of not only the creator, but audience as well.
Almost worse, it puts up a barrier to resistance to me even reading opposing views. When I see an anti-Christian comment on HN or Slashdot, I have no problem reading it and potentially responding to it. But if I see an anti-Christian article on Medium, I'm a bit reluctant to click on it, because 1) that person may get money as a result, and 2) it may promote that article to more people, potentially leading to even more articles on a similar vein being written. I assume the situation is the same for lots of ideological positions -- Conservatives avoiding reading Liberal think-pieces, etc.