The biggest question in journalism today: how do you pay for the news? Headlines warn of impending doom because today’s business model where advertising supports free news seems to have crashed. Those seeking answers from conventional wisdom declare that people will never pay for something they’ve traditionally gotten for free, but pressforthePeople survey takers seem to disagree.

We asked: “What business model would you be willing to support to guarantee that you and others have access to high quality, rigorously non-partisan, and original news reporting about issues you care about?”

The possible answers were:

I think journalism should always be free and fully supported by advertising.

I think journalism should always be free and fully supported by the government.

I think journalism should always be free and fully supported by volunteer contributions.

I’m willing to pay a modest monthly fee, perhaps as much as a coffee drink, to guarantee that truly independent reporting occurs on issues that I care deeply about.

I’m willing to pay a little more per month, perhaps as much as a dinner at a restaurant for one, to guarantee that truly independent reporting occurs on a range of issues that are important to society.

I think the answer is a combination of the above.

I think the answer is something entirely different from the options listed above.

Survey Takers said They’d Pay:

One-out-of-three survey takers volunteered that they would pay a subscription fee as a primary guarantor of their access to reliable, non-partisan information. A combined one-in-ten said journalism should be free and fully supported by either advertising, the government or donations.

The willingness of pressforthePeople survey takers to pay for news is more dramatic when it is part of a collection of revenue streams meant to guarantee the existence of reliable information in the future. Eight-three percent of survey takers either opted for subscriptions as the outright solution or as part of a solution that also included revenue from advertising, government and donations.

We asked our survey takers to explain their opinion, and many dove right into an issue that seems as difficult for news consumers to answer as it is for news companies to solve.

Bob Pendleton of Alameda, California says journalism should be free and supported by the government. “It’s taken me years to lose faith in advertiser-supported journalism. But I have seen so many examples of biased reporting that I must blame advertising. In a country with a vibrant democracy, government-supported journalism can work, because the interest groups will keep journalism honest. But this model would not work in a dictatorship.”

One survey taker from Havana, Florida advocated for a completely new model: “I like the approach that part of the purchase price of certain items (radios, TVs, computers, books, kindles, etc.) be used to finance media — along with government sponsored tax breaks as another source of funding. Caveat being that news sources that are funded in this way MUST be assiduously nonpartisan. If you want to finance partisan, that must be paid for totally privately and labeled as such.”

“Many people used to pay for their news in the form of the local newspaper, but when reporting became shoddy and irrelevant they stopped paying,” wrote one Texan who supports a subscription price for news. “I believe in capitalism, so I believe if someone offers a valuable service such as unbiased journalism, the market will pay a fair price for it. I also believe in the real time shift of news to an Internet environment, which is another reason for the collapse of the daily newspaper.

“This is the million-dollar question,” writes Bonnie Marshall of Minneapolis, MN. “I do not, at this time, have a definitive answer. I do know that we get the journalism we deserve, and so far we haven’t paid for anything other than subscriptions (that are then used to build advertising formulas). I think there should be a diverse income stream of both public and private support. Check in on how this model is doing: http://www.minnpost.com/ I believe after 1-2 years they are making it with private support, but they cannot afford to pay their reporters a living wage. Even the St. Pete Times is struggling with the private support they have. These are the difficult questions of post-modern America. Our information is fractured and muddy and overly commercialized. Our democracy is at stake.”

Our democracy is indeed at stake, and we need your help. Please add your comment to this conversation. If you haven’t taken the survey, please take it now. If you have taken the survey, please invite friends and family do the same. We feel an informed public is at the heart of democracy, and more than anything, our goal is to find a way to guarantee access to quality reporting on issues that impact our lives.

Paul