Has the paywall protected AA Gill from wider criticism?
The row over AA Gill's review of Clare Balding's new show has been simmering all week, eventually reaching the front page of The Guardian on Saturday.
What is intriguing is that this is the first time a Times or Sunday Times piece has been embroiled in controversy since the paywall was erected. The last newspaper column to be surrounded by such high profile accusations of homophobia was Jan Moir's vile piece about Stephen Gately. The link to that was zipping around the Twittersphere in seconds. By contrast, a week on from the publication of AA Gill's review, and I still haven't read the original piece in question.
Nor have the rest of us been able to get a glimpse of whether his comments sparked much outrage amongst the paying online Sunday Times users, as the community is closed to outsiders.
It does rather hark back to a previous age - where reporters reported on what had been said about a story, and you had to take their word for it, rather than the audience being able to Google it for themselves.
As it is, with the paywall in place, rather than making our own minds up about whether AA Gill was nasty and homophobic, it now seems we'll have to wait for the PCC to judge it for us.