You seem to believe that these two points of view are mutually exclusive. I used the word "also" intentionally because I believe they are compatible.
I firmly believe we can and should build non-exclusive non-silo search engine options. Data salary for general search use is probably a bad thing overall. I'm excited to see a world where competitors to the major search engines that are more open exists.
But at the same time, we're not talking about individual consumers. Individual consumers don't have much market power and dust can't express much choice. The daily Mail is a massive corporation and a massive publication. They could have made other choices, and elected to use other business models. They didn't. And to be honest I don't have much sympathy for them in this. If a single source of revenue dominates everything else that you do you are not an effective news organization. You're probably not even effective corporation is a whole, as most people who run companies Tell you not to overconcentrate your income in one source.
Hmm, could it be that the system is set up in a certain way that most would make these choices? And does that benefit society?
If DailyMail had not made those choices but someone else did, then THEY wouls be the subject of the news.
Unless you are saying that there is absolutely no reason why there is a monopoly in those areas.