Ted and jakewins both advocate subscribing to support newspapers and journalism. I absolutely agree that quality journalism is essential and should be paid for

Ted and jakewins both advocate subscribing to support newspapers and journalism. I absolutely agree that quality journalism is essential and should be paid for. But aim higher: In addition to subscribing, try to find a funding method that actually will work in the long run. Specifications, in no order: A) Journalists have sufficient funds to do quality work, earn a decent living, and attract talented, dedicated people to the profession. B) Journalists can speak truth to power and to an angry Internet mob. They are free from influence by their funders, to a great degree. C) The quality work is as widely distributed as possible. This is essential: If only subscribers can read it, then only tiny portion of the online world can benefit and it's not part of the public conversation. Instead of the Internet dream (very achievable) of distributing valuable content effortlessly, we're back to the old days of it being available only to a few subscribers and everyone else subsists on 'fake news'. It's a question that's been asked many times, but so far nobody has solved it (and specification C is usually ignored).