I can only tell you what I think won't work...

I love how Shirky explains the fall of newspapers - people don't need newspapers, but society needs journalism. Even the constitution explains the necessity of the freedom of the press, and their has to BE a press for there to be freedom of the press. 

So then what has happened? The unexpected. I like how Shirky explains that the newspaper people knew the internet would change things and tried to plan for it. Granted, some older journalists are a bit stuffy and rigid - but I feel like the general public doesn't give editors enough credit. How in the world could they have known what would have happened?

Honestly, I'm not sure how to fix the problem. If I did, I would be doing it as we speak. But I don't think individually funding stories works well at all. The whole point of journalism is to be as timely as possible. And if you're waiting for money to come in to start a story, it could be months until you "break" the story.

I suppose the only thing I can think of is if reporters started blogs and everyone only wrote local stories. The general public would get served and know information. Perhaps journalism will turn into more of a citizen duty than a job. But as a journalism major what in the world are we suppose to do for money then??? I suppose all news could be broadcasted via web sites. But advertising alone is a risky business venture. 

Some say the iPad will revolutionize the newspaper industry - finally something that is digital, but that people can actually hold.

I disagree. I think there is something magical about the glossy pages of a magazine or getting a bit of black ink from freshly printed papers on your fingers. Then again that's why I'm a journalist and if everyone felt this way than we wouldn't be in this predicament.