It's not just that the product itself is easy to copy, it's that the facts themselves are not copywritable, only the writing is. Meaning a source without that restriction provides the value without the cost.
With the exception of more creative editorial pieces, most news falls into this bucket.
You're still saying that the work involved in collecting those facts -- journalism -- is without value, and if no one bothers to do this professionally because their work will just be instacopied, so be it.
You can be the person who just complains about how people don't appreciate journalism, or you can acknowledge the reality and think in more productive ways. The ones who make a difference are generally the ones who think more productively instead of just blaming the people who "don't get it".
If traditional media journalism was truly appreciated, then they wouldn't even have this problem. And honestly they have lost a lot of respect from people in the recent years because they have been doing a lot of things to undermine their own journalistic principles in order to make more money.
The fact that someone prefers to cheap out and read the copy-pasted version doesn't mean they don't appreciate the paywalled version; it just means they want it for free. For all we know, it was high-quality journalism.
With the exception of more creative editorial pieces, most news falls into this bucket.