But "advertising" today is a twisted caricature of sponsorship models of years ago.
Advertising, like "location services" has become a two-way surveillance system.
I would love to be able to have a system of payment where we could pay a small amount of money for high-quality journalism? (and do it actually anonymously)
Unless someone kickstarts a system like that, which would be insanely high startup cost with insanely high risk, the way to actually get to what you are talking about is for a lot more people to pay for the news, so eventually they can stop relying on advertising.
Another way is to boycott news with advertising so that they're forced to find a model that doesn't rely on it. Why is advertising the only choice here? Why do you assume they'll drop that revenue stream when they "get enough subscribers"?
Boycotting generally doesn't work. When Trump was elected there was a lot of fuss to boycott companies that did business with Trump, but it had no effect.
> Why do you assume they'll drop that revenue stream when they "get enough subscribers"?
Fair, I don't know if they will. I'm just saying that I don't see a better choice on the table right now. NOT subscribing to the news is not a better choice to me.
