"Even if I cough up for the paper, I'm restricted ethically, if not legally, in what I can reproduce. So essentially, everything we see in the media on these things has already been "cherry-picked," and we only hear complaints when the cherry-picking is not politically correct.
I fully support the right of these journals to ask for payment for these things, but would it kill them to take the one or two papers that have become major news items and put them out into the public? At least after a period of time?"

Obviously global warming is not an important issue. When something important like say Aids in Africa- business take extraordinary measures to enable that these important drugs can save lives. Whereas if you got something about as important as football, you extract from the public every penny you can get away with.
Of course, you don't need this to prove it. What better way to say that something has no importance, then allowing the UN to "manage it".