I can imagine a number of models, but what would cause them to happen is another question. Most of the funding for news gathering currently is not subscriptions of purchases, but advertising. Subscriptions and single copy purchases are essentially guarantees to advertisers that someone is reading or viewing whatever vehicle they use for advertising. Peter Barnes, the millionaire former Working Assets CEO has an interesting proposal to deal with this. A lot of economists favor Pigouvian taxation, taxing "bads" as opposed to "goods". Advertising turns readers into products rather than customers, and the writing/vidding from product to bait. In its effect on public discourse it is a "bad", at least looked at from our perspective. (You can find early writing at the founding the PR and advertising industry at what a wondrous thing this is, how well it undermines subversive elements.) So treat it as a bad and tax. Barnes essentially recommends a tax on advertising and PR spending to be turned into vouchers distributed equally among the population, usable for purchasing any media free of advertising, and unsubsidized from PR budgets. This is an interesting way in general to fund any art and journalist that is better at attracting readers and viewers and than at attracting advertisers.
Another suggestion I sometimes hear is a tax on media that can hold info (paper, DVDS, solid state drives, hard drives, etc) that is paid out to content creators based on downloads or printing of their works in lieu of copyright protection.
I doubt either of these is what we will end up with in practice.