It’s a kicker for the online news environment to rely on this same tired, old business model that has newspapers circling the drain: a nearly complete reliance on ad sales to keep business going. In the print world, selling ads meant generating fluff stories that appealed to readers. Online, it means keeping tabs on Twitter’s trending topics — prepubescent pop star Justin Bieber seems to be the shit these days — and then cranking out fluff copy on those subjects to woo Google and other search bots.

Despite inflated page views and low overhead, True/Slant and Examiner have yet to turn a profit. It’s pathetic. PAH-thetic.

Of course, some hyperlocal news sites have done well for themselves strictly through ad sales. The hyperlocal economies of those beats are healthy enough to support such publications and their writers, so if the business model ain’t broke, then don’t fix it.

But what if this Great Recession treats the economy to a summer sequel? Or what if (for whatever reason) page views don’t translate to ad sales? Even worse, what if the quality of reporting suffers because writers can’t or don’t get paid? Then it’s time to have an alternate revenue stream ready, if it isn’t already up and running.

The New World Order demands innovative strategies for generating revenue, and I don’t just mean psyching out the search engines to drive page views. It means hosting events with cover charges, offering web-design services, selling stock photography, and forming Groupon-like arrangements with local businesses to sell products beyond news. It might also mean converting a for-profit project into a nonprofit one to bring in donations, or charging subscription fees for premium content.

It should not mean fluff content cranked out by pay-per-click writers. If a hyperlocal news site’s business model supports nothing but that, then it’s working either the wrong model or the wrong business. Innovative and diversified revenue streams beget better pay, better writers and less Bieber.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Daniel Ogren.

It’s for the latter that I would pay a monthly subscription to jump The Times’ pay wall, announced Wednesday. Don’t know what it’ll cost me. Don’t really care. Just give me unlimited access to Mark Bittman, and send me the damn bill.

But how does this announcement pay off for hyperlocal news sites?

First, it reminds news consumers of the concept of supply and demand. If readers are jonesing for information, then the journalist producing that content should be compensated appropriately for providing the fix.

Second (and perhaps more importantly), the pay wall concept reminds hyperlocal journalists that their time and energy are worth more than the reader’s appreciative pat on the back. Hyperlocal news has civic value. Now let’s give it monetary value.

That’s not to say that readers will pay to read about local businesses or municipal politicians. Believe it or not, that kind of news eventually leaches into the community, whether the hyperlocal news source reports it or not.

Instead, hyperlocal news sites can repackage distinct material as “premium” content. Weekly entertainment calendars, restaurant reviews, and real-estate articles can be placed behind a pay wall (or under a guard kitty, above) or emailed to readers for a subscription fee.

For some publications, this means no additional work beyond billing and distribution, though those are no small tasks. For others, it may mean producing new content. Either way, it’s one revenue stream to consider, made possible by The New York Times.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user dominicmercier.