If you are a paying customer, they don't (source: am a subscriber, never seen this). If you don't pay for a subscription, they need to monetize you in some other way- like by showing you more valuable ads.

You can get a very cheap online-only subscription if you have Amazon Prime, strong recommend.

New York Times solicits paying subscribers to disable their ad blocker (on mobile).

If you don't pay for the product, you are the product.

If you pay for the product, it shows that you have disposable income, making you an even more valuable product.

Aaand.. Not just on mobile now.

You'll go from being slightly tracked to tracked within an inch of your life if you use Amazon Prime.

Because they want to track you. There's really no other excuse for asking users to disable something called "tracking protection."

remember how just one election ago building undecided voter profiles and serving them target propaganda helped influence the outcome massively?

people still believe it's just for monetization and advertisement like it's 2005, but tracking people getting information across multiple sources can build an extremely accurate profile to be targeted at an election cycle.

Those undecided voters profiles are worth a lot more per unit than facebooks' to the right group.

Why else would anyone target newspapers for profiling, people don't consume and don't exhibit targetable purchasing behavior on those sites. No, they are interested on what you think, not what they can sell you.