I was thinking specifically journalism and newspapers, which acted as our national "town squares" up until social media killed it. Advertisers would pay for a p

I was thinking specifically journalism and newspapers, which acted as our national "town squares" up until social media killed it. Advertisers would pay for a portion of the page and we would paste in their business card alongside the news and opinions. That's how we used to fund public debate. Now we fund it by watching advertisements scroll past tweets by journalists and politicians, debating and sharing memes. Meta and Twitter reap those profits now. "Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one." –A.J. Liebling I just think it would be cool if the public had some kind of ownership over the debate, rather than someone else who gets to determine the terms under which it occurs. The internet was supposed to be our public square. Even better if the public can profit from all the money that gets generated from selling our attention. We can use that for public services, like you mention. You did a great job, though. Thanks.