I believe one of the greatest inventions of all time is the Internet. Online, I can access a plethora of information at my fingertips — something unimaginable just a few decades ago. But too often, I stumble across a groundbreaking tidbit of information and see an unwelcome message: $29.99 to finish reading this academic article.

Really? Another paywall?

Paywalls hide information behind a monetary barrier, either fully blocking content or offering limited access, perhaps by revealing only a paper’s abstract. Many require subscription to their service, subscriptions that are oftentimes insurmountably expensive for access to only one journal on one topic. Since larger journals also produce niche publications that require separate subscriptions, access to all information from just one publisher can cost thousands of dollars.

As a student in a public high school that could not afford subscriptions to such services, paywalls made doing research and learning from primary sources extremely difficult. I was limited in what I could access, and as a result, I often felt my work to be incomplete. My experience has been remarkably different since coming to college, because Harvard subscribes to a host of journals and publishers. In 2012, the University reported spending $3.75 million on journal subscriptions alone to accommodate its wide assortment of fields of study. This fee is difficult for many universities to front — some, including Harvard, have canceled subscriptions to journals due to rising costs.

Lack of access to journals can have a significant negative impact on research. Publishing research is designed as a way to communicate findings and techniques; it is cumulative, as new research builds off older findings, and knowing which methods work can save valuable time and resources. Take the incandescent lightbulb, for example, which, although often attributed to Thomas Edison, was built off the work of many scientists. In today’s climate, perhaps Edison would not have been able to pioneer his model, because a paywall might prevent him from accessing the designs of his contemporaries.

For students, reading publications is one of the best ways to learn about new fields of study; it helped spark my interest in biology. But without access to reputable information from scholarly sources, it becomes difficult to explore interests and pursue research of our own.

While working to publish research from my science fair project in high school, I needed to read many articles about my topic, but found it a challenge to access more than a quick summary because I simply could not afford to pay for every article individually. Utilizing cited sources within the primary literature and review articles allowed me to finish my research, but I had to spend many frustrating hours digging through sources to find the necessary information. Rather than spending time writing, and polishing my analysis, paywalls forced me to use that time looking for loopholes on the Internet.

Despite its unavailability, many students require scholarly information to succeed in their studies. As a result, many use sites like Sci-Hub, through which moderators download articles to which they have paid access and make them available for free. The use of such sites is often illegal in the United States, as downloading articles from them can break copyright laws. This is disadvantageous for everyone involved, including researchers who lose their intellectual property, and is not an adequate solution to the paywall problem.

One way researchers and journals are beginning to combat paywalls is through publishing data and research open access — that is, free of charge and accessible to everyone. Several journals have made their whole catalog open access. Other journals have given researchers the option to make their articles open access if the authors themselves pay an additional sum of money on top of other publishing fees. This model, which relies on researchers’ existing funding, can be even more profitable for journals than a standard subscription model, as they can charge unrestrictedly high amounts of money to publish open access. But the same problem arises — since many research institutions struggle to find funding, this system incentivizes researchers to publish behind a paywall.

The reluctance publishing companies feel about removing paywalls is understandable, but there are many alternatives for earning money on digital platforms. Relying on donations, like Wikipedia, or including advertisements are possible solutions. Although it may be inconvenient for users to view advertisements in the middle of an article, this could allow research to be shared more widely. Journals could alternatively employ student discounts, offer free subscriptions for educational institutions, or allow free viewing of articles for a limited time to help promote opportunities to learn.

We are no longer limited by location and access to books or libraries to learn new things. Rather than treating publicly shared research as a commodity, journals should consider removing paywalls to make education more equitable. Everybody deserves the opportunity to engage with the cutting edge of human ingenuity, and removing paywalls is an important first step in that direction.

Sandhya Kumar ’26, a Crimson Editorial editor, lives in Greenough Hall.