A better way to pay for journalism

 I really don't know why I share my thoughts, but here's another one.

I hate macro data collection. I think it's a gross invasion of privacy and completely goes against the 4th Amendment (The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.) 

The fact that said data collection by big tech is not technically done by the government but by said industry with the blessing of our government is tantamount to the same. That's my opinion, anyway.

Btiching without suggestion is not my style.

Here's my latest big idea that I'll never fulfill. 

If I were a web developer, I would create a news and non-fiction content search that facilitated easy transactions for reading content. Let me explain.

Let's say that I want to read the Wall Street Journal article about the gigantic profits of the world's premier widget manufacturer. The Wall Street Journal wants me to be a subscriber, however. They need to pay their staff and all of the overhead that is required to run a company, of course. 

In the olden days, the drivers of revenue were ads in the paper and classifieds in that dedicated section. 

Craig's List, job listing sites like Monster, and Facebook marketplace have destroyed the classifieds stream. (These assertions have been widely reported.)

That "nobody" reads the print versions of these means that the ads that one would find in the printed pages are no longer as valuable. (This assertion is a logical assumption of mine.)

Instead, like the rest of the internets, data is collected as we go through sites so that companies can figure out what to market to us (not necessarily a bad thing - I've dealt successfully with targeted marketing) but also how to keep us engaged for longer. 

Can we agree that data collection is a bad thing?

And, what if there was a better way for the written word to be more valuable to produce?

What I propose is this: an account that pays for articles that we read. Let's say, for example, that we want to read the reporting on the Pandora Papers . The ICIJ does have a donate button, but what if there was an easier process? What if I had a small, dedicated amount of money, in a digital wallet that was for the sole purpose of paying for these articles. Furthermore, if we are "all" paying, then we actually wouldn't have to pay very much per person to make a huge impact. 

How would it work? I have an I-pass. When I drive on the tollway, I can roll right through the tolls because I have an RF transmitter that pulls a fee from an account for which I have pre-loaded money. Why not with articles?

But I don't want to pay $1.00 per article!?! My response: we shouldn't need to! I think the average price per article would be in the $0.01 to $0.05 per article. Let's say 1,000,000 people read an article: that's $10,000 if it's the penny price and $50k for the nickel. And, if it's a debit transaction as opposed to a credit transaction, then it's a cheaper transaction price. 

I'm sure there is a lot that I don't know about e-commerce that would make this complicated, but I do think it could work.

That's my idea. If you like it, take it and make it happen!