In 2025, newspapers and magazines continue to bleed out with self-inflicted death by a thousand digital cuts. So many publishers are clinging to an 1820s business mode patching it with outdated and grade C+ strategies to generate revenue. But now, AI content and instant feeds dominating the web, irrelevance isn't inevitable even with the onslaught of cheap and easy content.
Today AI is rewriting (literally) the fundamental playbook across every industry, Fintech is also building a new financial model for Web3 and beyond, while journalism clings to a business model that emerged when people read newspapers by gas lamps. The result? The technology to save publishing exists. Someone just needs to flip the switch.
I've Watched This Movie Before
In the early 2000s, I led the digital division for the 5th largest magazine publisher in the world just as the first "print is dead" panic was beginning and fears of cannibalization began limiting content online to preserve subscriptions and newsstand sales. While competitors en masse began launching paywalls and prayed, I did something different.
I made a mistake. One of our trademarked and copyrighted characters “Bat Boy” was a viral success and I pursued several sites that integrated his image into their sites – in small ways – to keep it exclusive to us because it was what I was supposed to do. I saw site traffic crater by doing so. Lesson learned. I backed off and made relationships with a few of these sites to allow for its use going forward by harnessing some of the benefits seen with prior use by sharing our links from time to time.
I then launched a test to use the site to prove digital could drive both newsstand sales and subscriptions on the data-driven premise the online audience was a new segment not going to the newsstand and it could be used as a gateway drug to print editions. The Wall Street Journal proclaimed it was proof print without paywalls was dead. The Hollywood Reporter mocked it. Many in the industry called it a stupid stunt.
But the result told a different story. We had a viral hit. The online site had as many visitors each month as newsstand sales, and our test proved the audience was different than the newsstand buyer. Newsstand sales that week surged by 15% for a 2x as expensive double issue and a case study was born.
The lesson learned: Industries don't die from new technology. They die from refusing to integrate it.
We've Seen This Playbook Fail Before
Trying to maintain total control of content and distribution online is a fool’s errand. The internet flipped the communication model from one-to-many to many-to-many, and influence shifted from brands proclaiming they have the “best X” to audiences deciding it for themselves. That’s what fueled the rise of influencers and a lack of understanding of that shift has crippled media companies ever since.
Music industry: The music industry removed singles from the marketplace and forced entire album purchases with “one good song” - it was more profitable - while fighting peer to peer networks like Napster and LimeWire in court for copyright infringement. Pirates filled the vacuum not only on these publicly known sites, but on platforms like Hotline remained hidden behind the scenes until…. Apple made buying easier than stealing. Singles were available again at the frictionless $.99 per song. This started with DRM which limited playback, causing increased friction for many, but has since been removed. Then Spotify emerged and other streaming platforms have further reduced the friction to listening to music the end user wants to hear - all customizable to taste and wants either to deal with ads - like you’d hear on radio, or for a monthly fee to remove the ads - a cost that’s rarely seen if at all once subscribed. The end result has been continued growth: 2024 global recorded music revenues hit $29.6 billion, up 4.8% from the prior year, and projections show it climbing toward $110.8 billion by 2032 in retail terms which is on track to surpass inflation-adjusted peaks from the CD era in the coming years. Sure, it took two decades of pain and adaptation, but the industry's recovery proves integration wins, even if it's not instantaneous.
TV Networks Movie studios: The Movie and TV Networks watched the music industry's lawsuits against Napster and individual downloaders take too much time with increasing costs before any relief was granted while at the same time achieved the rare feat of alienating both fans and artists. This lead to some bands creating new models. For instance Radiohead's 2007 "In Rainbows" pay-what-you-want release made more money than their previous traditional album, seeming to highlight the RIAA's enforcement-heavy model was damaging the relationships of both fans and artists.
But all of this was to maintain a model that would fail to integrate the emerging models that would amplify distribution and new revenue streams. For instance, making the same mistake I made while in publishing, MTV's parent company Viacom, sued YouTube for $1 billion in 2007 rather than building partnership or building their own version - something that would have been immediately embraced by a network whose core audience is essentially today's TikTok audience. They could have been TikTok and owned the entire Millennial and now Gen Z audience for the next 30-40 years going in when they had the mass appeal they commanded at the time. It would have been on brand and there’s no reason to think it would only be embraced and amplified with the types of shows it was transitioning to.
Newspapers and Magazines: Sigh Publishers today are running the exact same gasping-for-air strategy they’ve been doing for the last 20 years. As a result, digital voices everywhere have reduced both their authority and influence. Print editions seem to focus on collectible editions with quality content as value ad - rather than a ubiquitous feature across all issues and certainly not online - and still the digital versions feature paywalls, ad overloads and a user experience that treats readers like they’re navigating Omaha Beach in 1944 to find the content they’re interested in before being shot by some dark pattern placed ad links.
The pattern is always the same: fight the future until someone else builds it for you.
The Math That Should Inspire Every Publisher
The LA Times has an estimated 275,000 digital subscribers at $60/year. That's approximately $16.5 million annually.
They also get 194 million pageviews monthly. That’s 2.33 billion page views per year.
At just $0.01 per pageview in a frictionless micropayment system, that's $23.3 million annually.
That's 41% more revenue potential with zero paywalls and a happier readership.
The New York Times has 17.4 billion annual pageviews at $0.03 each = $522 million. That matches their current ad revenue without a single intrusive banner.
But What About Smaller, More Niche Publishers? Let’s take a look…
Publishers like Dotdash Meredith and Ziff Davis have multiple titles. Dotdash Meredith's digital revenue hit $224 million in Q1 2025 alone, up 7% year-over-year, while Ziff Davis reported $352.2 million in Q2 revenue, up 9.8%. The math works out similarly across their titles and would allow for more content, interactive tools/features that could drive a larger # of shares, page views and engagements, not as a replacement for existing revenue but as a blend, initially integrating with current paywalls for casual readers while adding micropayments as an additive layer where additive user features, functions and content could amplify reader value and brand revenues. No cannibalization to start; it's hybrid growth that builds on what works.
The Technology Exists. The Math Works. So Why Isn't This Everywhere?
Brave Software, Inc., creator of the Brave browser, already built the payment rails. Their browser + Basic Attention Token (BAT) ecosystem connects readers and publishers while respecting privacy. No surveillance ads. No data harvesting.
The problem? BAT's price has stagnated around $0.15-0.16 as of August 2025, despite Roadmap 3.0's upgrades like multi-chain settlements and AI integrations rolling out in Q1. It's been locked inside their own ecosystem meaning you need Brave browser, Brave ads, Brave everything. That's a bottleneck limiting growth, like Apple News without the massive built-in userbase. Crypto volatility and limited adoption beyond enthusiasts have kept it niche, but remember: No one saw the Pet Rock as viable either. It succeeded because it was cheap, novel, and timed right. BAT could be that underdog if Brave pivots smartly, ditching the lock-in for broader appeal.
Compare this to Apple News+: $12.99/month for access to a curated club where Apple decides whose content gets in, how content is surfaced, and how revenue splits. It's digital feudalism that’s exclusive, closed, controlled and ultimately limits smaller publishers from building better, more compelling and higher quality content.
Brave could be the opposite.
Instead of a walled garden, they could build an open highway just like the early internet, where you could go anywhere, discover anything, and the infrastructure didn't care what browser you used. The best content and voices won. They can also implement and maintain their guardrails with the publication sites that use it by integrating the Brave Wallet.
But here's the empathy check: Brave's current focus via Rewards 3.0 leans heavy on Web3 DeFi, gaming NFTs, and metaverse integrations for BAT. Great for niche crypto fans, but NFTs??? In 2021 Beeple's "Everydays: The First 5,000 Days" NFTsold for $69.3 million. Today it’s worth an estimated $47,000. That’s still about $48,900 too much. Metaverse??? It’s already dead (again) - users don’t care. Even Apple’s Vision Pro is a flop. However, one thing that’s clear as X users lament, it's left BAT stagnant despite 91M users loving the browser. Publishing offers sustainability: intent-driven reach, enthusiast amplification from journalists seeing BAT benefits firsthand, sparking organic buzz that could bootstrap gaming adoption too.
Any fintech upstart company with blockchain chops could build this infrastructure. But Brave's ahead: BAT's scalable on Ethereum (handling spikes via layer-2 like Optimism for low fees), SDKs could extend via WebExtensions API for Chrome/Safari integration (though cross-browser challenges like varying privacy policies need sandboxed iframes). Security? Zero-knowledge proofs for anon payments, plus Brave Wallet's Gemini tie-in for fiat ramps top up once, pay invisibly. Promises intact: no data leaks, as BAT's opt-in ads prove.
Trends are shifting. Micropayments are gaining traction in 2025, with Google adding tools for publishers to collect them amid AI traffic erosion, and reports highlighting AI-enabled hybrids as a key trend for news subscriptions. Past failures like Blendle or Scroll lacked modern biometrics and seamless integrations; now, with Apple Pay/Google Pay, it's a different game.
Brave's metaverse chase is like betting on Vogons for poetry. It's hype without heart. Publishing? It's real, sustainable gold.
The Billion-Dollar Blueprint - Just a Small Pivot Needed
Here's what Brave could do immediately to amplify its overall marketplace value.
Universal micropayments that work everywhere: Chrome, Safari, Edge, mobile and not just Brave. One frictionless wallet readers can top up once ($20-50) and use across every participating publisher just like the Starbucks app, with Apple Pay or Google Pay for "click, Face ID, done" refills. No subscriptions, no passwords, no gates. Just invisible payments as pages load.
Publishers keep their audience relationships. Brave just runs the frictionless Visa network for journalism and social platforms while continuing its ramp up into gaming.
Push into new platform venues like Vimeo, Onlyfans, Patreon, Gumroad.
If I Were Running Brave's Growth Strategy:
- Go browser-agnostic immediately. Extensions and SDKs for every platform. Maintain higher rewards by gamifying use of Brave, but open the toolset.
- Land 3 flagship partners like Ziff Davis, Dotdash Meredith, and A360 Media with revenue guarantees: Pay $500K upfront per partner for a 1 year trial, covering integration. Once they hit $500K in micropayment revenue (Brave takes a cut to be made whole), they keep the growth. Publishers promote it to their audiences via seamless top-ups, turning readers into payers without fatigue.
- Integrate with existing paywalls. Let micropayments replace hard walls for casual readers and add free BAT for referrals who join (the publishers keep the referrals).
- Gamify sharing. Reward readers with BAT wallet credits when their shares drive paid views (limitations to prevent abuse).
- Own the "Spotify for News" narrative. Publishers already understand that analogy.
Why This Changes Everything
For Publishers: Higher yield per page, cleaner user experience, independence from surveillance capitalism and the ability to tell better, more resonant stories that build lasting trust and authority.
For Readers: Frictionless access across the entire web with one payment method. No more hitting paywalls or drowning in ads and the ability to surf freely with quality content.
For Brave: Evolution from niche browser to the invisible backbone of an open content economy and the ability to amplify growth with a more valuable token, more valuable platform and the ability for enthusiasts to tell their story for them.
Urgency Alert: Everyone Knows There’s an AI Junk Tidal Wave Coming
In many instances, it’s already here, but it’s going to get far worse with Generative AI. Publishers have maybe 12 to 18 months before they become completely irrelevant to the average reader's information diet due to the tsunami of AI created content. Search won’t yield anything like it once did and combined with AI already summarizing articles before readers visit sites, it’s going to be harder and harder to be seen even with optimal SEO. Google is testing AI-generated search results. Meta's building AI that answers questions without sending traffic anywhere.
Now add Veo 3, Sora, and MindSeek video segments and Grok/Claude/ChatGPT generated articles - not edited, but shared as is saturating social/web with junk content. It’s already got a name. AI Slop. We’re in for a world of endless SEO slop as a result. Traditional pubs win by doubling down on quality: exclusive scoops, deep dives, first-access journalism that AI can't fake. Micropayments reward that authority, driving views and revenue.
But if Brave doesn't act? Google Pay expands into content (they're eyeing micro-transactions via Android and already added publisher tools), Apple News+ balloons with bundled micropays, Meta scoops the rails for "open" news. First-mover window slams shut. Big Tech owns the pipes, publishers remain serfs keeping a fraction of their yield.
With AI junk flooding the web, quality news is the antidote, micropayments make it pay.
Social Proof: Not Just Me Yelling into the Void
I'm not alone here. Back in 2017 Digiday's Max Willens wrote "Publishers are giving micropayments another look in the reader revenue hunt." Even skeptics like CJR's James Ball admit, "Don't call them micropayments—they won't work alone, but hybrids could."
I wholeheartedly disagree with assessments that micropayments won’t work outright. Past flops didn't have today's tech like seamless Apple/Google Pay integrations or AI-driven hybrids. I watched and interacted with the audience deeply. There’s hubris in publishing that was made very clear to me when I was told, “I spent 5 years building this site and you’re doing it the wrong way.” Yet, under the strategies I used it reached record readership and content distribution and it was a consistent month over month trend…. for the two years It was my primary focus.
Brave has the technology, the token economics, and the privacy-first positioning to be the hero in this story, especially with Roadmap 3.0's on-chain upgrades providing a foundation for a pivot.
The only question: Will they pivot from Metaverse and NFT to build the future of publishing, or watch someone else run away with their billion-dollar plus opportunity?
Because make no mistake, someone will build this. The math is good, the technology too ready, and the current system too obviously broken.
The race isn't to market anymore. It's to execution.
And the winner gets to own the infrastructure that powers journalism for the next decade.