> readership is easily measured This is probably a big part of the problem. Online ad revenues aren't going to equal those for print, simply because there is s

> readership is easily measured This is probably a big part of the problem. Online ad revenues aren't going to equal those for print, simply because there is so much more visibility into targeting, reach and conversions. Thus, advertisers have a much better idea of the value of an impression/click, and can price accordingly, rather than indiscriminately shot-gunning eyeballs as in print. Entrenched cost structures contribute to the problem, but the fact is that paying a professional staff to produce quality content every day costs a lot of money, and online there are fewer dollars coming in per reader, even if the total audience is much larger. The exception to this downward trend is if you have content catering to highly lucrative niches such as insurance or banking (although I don't know how these compare to similarly placed print ads). Premium video has a similar problem; advertising revenue is unsustainable for anything other than indie YouTube shows. The broadcast TV model could never work on the Internet. At least, that's my theory.