Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problems are in the details: why are news organizations exempt from this rule in Europe? You can’t read news websites unless you accept all cookies or pay to read. Who decides these things? How is such a rule in favor of privacy? Why is my site where I regularly post news not eligible? Who decides which sites are eligible? It’s these kind of moral double standards and cognitive dissonances that people have to end…
Are you sure they are exempt? I was always under the impression that their practice is pretty obviously illegal. I just did a quick google search and didn't find anything about exemption. So they are as exempt from the GDPR as much as Al Capone was exempt from taxes ;) What they seem to be exempt from is getting consent if they require the data for journalistic purposes. IANAL, but I think they are simply not followi…
> The scope of this opinion is indeed limited to the implementation by large online platforms
Separately, in the first couple of paragraphs, they basically complain that they don't like the alternative that platforms can legally implement of paywalls for all. :shrug: Which they may not like, but is legal. So consent or pay is essentially a realpolitik deal to not implement paywalls.