In the first, funding would come from industry associations and industry groups. In the second, the PR industry funds print journalism via a licensing system, which grants the license holder access to those journalists – similar to the registration of lobbyists.

Both concepts seem to create dependencies that would undermine journalistic independence and integrity, although the risk of this occurring in the second model could be minimised: “…to be a registered PR, one would stump up a fee that goes into an independently administered fund that is then redistributed to publishers with oversight to ensure it goes on wages” (Simon – in comments).

Putting aside the practical challenges of this model, some of which are discussed in the post, I doubt that the model would be sustainable. Funding from the PR industry would be a diminishing return as media relations become a smaller part of what PR agencies do.

Here’s where I come up with my alternative solve all solution.

I might need to get back to you on that but here are some other funding alternatives:

• Newspapers earn not for profit status and the associated financial and tax breaks
• Introduction of a subscription/ micro-payment system that covers multiple competing publications. Check out ViewPass, which would process payments and collect data to drive targeted advertising or trade content for information about the reader’s preferences and interest.
• Newspapers regulate the re-use of content – in the same way that the music industry does.
• Philanthropy may sustain some publications.

The subject is such an emotive and complex issue. I am definitely in the ‘newspapers are a good thing’ camp – but at the end of the day if the model ceases to work then we have to let ‘nature’ take its course.  Consolidation is inevitable but I think that the concept of a newspaper-less society is somewhat alarmist.

By the way, newspapers are flourishing in the developing world. 

Ultimately, I see a small number of print publications containing analysis and opinion available internationally, nationally and in major cities. They’ll play a key role in holding institutions, business and Government to account and would be supported by the not-for-profit- funding model if advertising revenue alone was not sufficient.

I am positive that the pendulum will swing back from digital to traditional media and that things will balance themselves out.

Quality print journalism will survive even if the industry is vastly consolidated and readers will turn to the Web for breaking news, trade/niche content,  entertainment and video. I don’t personally have an issue with a micro-pay scheme – I’d be happy to pay a small amount for quality content from someone that ‘appreciated the technical nuances of the fields concerned’.

There continues to be considerable opportunity for the newspaper industry to reduce cost which makes this scenario seem feasible. Moody’s estimates that just 14% of newspaper operating costs are related to content creation. It’s not all doom and gloom – there are still workable options.