Micropayment are a non-starter, and even if they weren't, you'd still have ads. There are companies lined up willing to pay money to show you something they wa

Micropayment are a non-starter, and even if they weren't, you'd still have ads. There are companies lined up willing to pay money to show you something they want to sell you, and even if your favorite news site was micropayment enabled, even the most righteous media companies would be fools not to keep taking that money to expand their ability to give you more and better news, as an example. But to my first point, they are a non-starter because too much of the world has trouble managing their money, and mentally don't want to pay for something until they've seen it. Why should I pay a dollar to read an article that might be poorly written, full of inaccuracies, etc.? The closest model I've seen to working is twitch. You have a central content platform, with silly cosmetic awards for subscription, and a sense of "credibility" among others there in interactions because you've been subscribing for x amount of time. This would require a more interactive news service, and hell, that I would pay for. If I read an article by an expert who answered (reasonable) follow up questions and owned their journalism, that would be incredible.