"Some conclude from the recent dire reports about the news business that people are no longer interested in serious journalism," Overholser and Cowan wrote. "In fact, more people than ever are consuming news. The Los Angeles Times, for example, still has nearly 750,000 subscribers to its daily print edition -- and it also attracts more than 9 million visitors to its website each month.
They proposed creative possibilities for government intervention.
"Congress could increase postal-rate subsidies for magazines," they wrote. "It could change tax policy to remove barriers to philanthropies purchasing major news outlets. FCC policies, including rules against cross-ownership, could be reconceived to reflect the new realities of the information marketplace. Antitrust laws could be revised to allow publications to band together to charge for content. The founders understood that writers should be compensated for their work and included the copyright clause in the Constitution. We need to be equally aggressive in finding new ways to protect and reward journalism's intellectual property in this new era."
They wrote that a banking-style bailout would be rejected out of hand by those concerned with maintaining a free and independent press, but there are other possibilities.
"Government action is no substitute for innovations in content and delivery mechanisms, or for fresh business models by news organizations," they wrote. "Nor is it a cure-all. Media owners, entrepreneurs, philanthropists, civic organizations, individual citizens and journalism schools all have a vital role to play. So do the consumers of news who might be asked to emulate listeners to public radio and pay to support the newspapers they read for free on the Web. But, as Washington and Madison recognized more than two centuries ago, the government has an indispensable role as well. This is the time to play it."