For the most part though aren't the majority of news stories, whether they hook to the left or swing to the right, simply a complete reprint of an Associate Press story? Local news is best grabbed via a local paper level, they will provide much more comprehensive stories than a large news media empire; the large media empire really hasn't the space or time to cover small local interest stories. Those local newspapers are struggling, but haven't died as they provide a unique service to their own particular communities. That assumes that they haven't been digested by a large media entity.
That local paper provides a unique service that I cannot acquire elsewhere. The larger media for the most part do not. The same story is available from a large variety of services, the only difference being a slightly different cut and paste editing job. The investment of that large media empire is their subscription to the AP and the time it took to cut and paste the story into their own paper. I am happy to pay to access local news because it is a unique service.
If those media empires decided to provide a unique service, like say reintroducing that severely endangered animal, the Investigative Reporter, who will not only tell you what is happening, but also the events which lead to it happening and how those events were able to occur, plus how this might affect future events; then I might just change my mind and pay for content. As it stands right now, I'll get my country/world level news for free (apart from watching ads on every available piece of space around said news) via RSS and websites that give me cut and paste AP stories for free.
It would also help sway me if their grammar was better than mine.
Happiness is twin floppies.