> You believe that there's some mythical "21st century" business model that will save journalism with no evidence to back that up.
There are plenty of free (paper) newspapers that are funded by advertising revenue. I don't see any reason in principle why it couldn't work for the online newspapers, who have lower overheads.
> I think donations sought by non-profits are a better way to fund journalism
You may well be right.
> that is decidedly pre-21st century
Except that it may well be easier to raise funds now with the internet. (Especially if/when we get a decent micropayment system.)
There are plenty of free (paper) newspapers that are funded by advertising revenue
I read one of those (Metro) on my commute to work every day, and it is, to put it mildly, very very bad. The reason they can be funded purely by advertising is because they seem to spend pretty close to zero on any sort of actual journalism.
There are plenty of free (paper) newspapers that are funded by advertising revenue. I don't see any reason in principle why it couldn't work for the online newspapers, who have lower overheads.
> I think donations sought by non-profits are a better way to fund journalism
You may well be right.
> that is decidedly pre-21st century
Except that it may well be easier to raise funds now with the internet. (Especially if/when we get a decent micropayment system.)