Comment by dspillett

My cynical view is that a lot of these outlets would have liked to block the archive anyway⁰ but didn't as it could look bad to do so, and AI scraping is a convenient excuse. Much like some (but far from all) of the recent job cuts that have been announced “due to AI”.

An even more cynical view is that the information on many local news sites in recent years isn't worth archiving anyway, it is largely generic rubbish filtered down from on high because these days most local outlets are owned by large national groups¹ that use them for little more than a place to insert adverts.

For actual local news, which those outlets do sometimes still carry, archiving personal blogs, event sites, and some social media content³, would be more useful than local news outlets. It is a shame that a lot of this has moved to platforms that are more difficult to archive (distraction media providers block the archive too, discord and similar services are more difficult to easily/meaningfully archive, heck searching for non-recent information on them that you know is there can be a pain, etc.)

--------

[0] For numerous reasons including some idea that it could affect their advertising revenue, that they don't want things which they correct [because they are actually wrong or because those higher up the ownership chain are happy with certain truths] are embarrassingly preserved in their original form, etc.

[1] Like Reach Plc or Newsquest¹ (which owns the most prominent local rag where I live) in the UK.

[2] Which is in turn owned by the US company USA Today Co.

[3] Though this is probably largely blocked from the archive too.