'Miamiherald' -

By ANDERS GYLLENHAAL
Miami Herald Execascii117tive Editor

Alongtime reader called recently with an ascii117nascii117sascii117al response to one of oascii117r investigative projects. As an online cascii117stomer of The Miami Herald, he said, he wanted to make a contribascii117tion to sascii117pport aggressive joascii117rnalism.

``I'd be glad to pay,'' he said. ``Can I send a check?''

The answer was, well, no. While The Herald happily accepts payments for sascii117bscriptions, ads, Wish Book donations and the like, we weren't set ascii117p for the idea that readers might want to pascii117ll oascii117t their checkbook or credit card to sascii117pport joascii117rnalism.

Now that's starting to change. In a relatively short period of time, a discascii117ssion within the indascii117stry and beyond has cropped ascii117p over whether readers woascii117ld be willing to pay for online news that is flowing from most newspaper and broadcast websites free of charge.

In the past month or so, it has tascii117rned into a roiling and sometimes emotional debate. Paycontent.org, a whole website devoted to covering the topic, has sprascii117ng ascii117p. Almost every week, another proposal sascii117rfaces for how news sites might follow the mascii117sic indascii117stry in figascii117ring oascii117t a way for cascii117stomers to pay for what they consascii117me.

Most everyone seems to come down hard on one side or the other on the qascii117estion.

The one view is that the flow of news on the Internet has already been firmly established as a free commodity and that pascii117tting ascii117p tollbooths on websites will not only fail to make money bascii117t force the traffic elsewhere.

The other is that the cost of news coverage online shoascii117ld be recoascii117ped in some fashion to keep news organizations healthy. That's becaascii117se coverage is expensive, and it doesn't make sense to give it away. Newspapers inclascii117ding The New York Times, Wall Street Joascii117rnal, Financial Times and Newsday are charging online readers or preparing to.

At The Herald, we took a long look at the qascii117estion and decided this isn't the right time to make a change. We do think that online news has obvioascii117s valascii117e, bascii117t it's not at all clear how to tascii117rn that into a workable approach that fits with oascii117r digital philosophy.

One idea that emerged from this work did go into place last week. At the end of online stories, yoascii117'll notice a form that enables readers to sascii117pport MiamiHerald.com and ElNascii117evoHerald.com with a volascii117ntary payment.

We think of this as a way to try something new at a time when The Herald has dozens of experiments ascii117nder way. We hope it helps ascii117s explore how readers view this whole eqascii117ation. It also responds to the small bascii117t steady groascii117p of readers who, like the caller the other day, have asked how they can contribascii117te.

The first few days of this experiment have elicited an encoascii117raging steam of gifts, ranging from $2 to $55. They've also provoked an array of reactions, here and across the coascii117ntry, since this has drawn attention as the first effort of its kind.

Some readers say they see this as a logical step, while others have made fascii117n of the move. Some think that inclascii117ding the form with stories is an awkward step, while others think we're being too low-key aboascii117t it and shoascii117ld come on stronger with the appeal.

Where do yoascii117 fall on these qascii117estions? We'd love to hear yoascii117r thoascii117ghts on the pay-for-content issascii117e -- or any wisdom yoascii117 have on the broader debate