1. If not a pay wall, then where would you prefer the funding come from?
2. Her critics will spew their hate, no matter what she does. They might not think it’s a field day, if her channel becomes financially sustainable. Apparently, there’s still time to make money shorting the MSM.
She could sell ads like everyone else. Calling it a "channel" and requiring a "subscription" is cheezy in my opinion. It isn't a "channel", it's a website behind a pay wall.
The cheezyness just takes away from her credibility, and her message is too valuable to be squandered like that. Just my opinion -- she can do whatever she wants. But I don't know what she is thinking.