I think it's really dishonest to represent 4chan as "ground zero for orchestrated harassment" and "[a site where] some of its users created a set of code words to help users make racist and bigoted slurs".
It's like saying Earth is a place where people have their organs stolen and sold and where babies die. It is technically correct, of course, but it's very disingenuous to describe it that way to outsiders.
I would go on and talk about what I think 4chan really stands for, but I assume most people on HN are pretty familiar with the site, so just know that I am in the camp that likes how it is (or used to be?) a last bastion of freedom and anonymity (not Tor-like, but where the UX is designed to not have profiles and usernames) and free discourse on the internet.
The main thing I want to mention is that having money problems is absolutely nothing new to 4chan. Moot's comments have traditionally been along the lines of "4chan will always consume all available bandwidth". The nature of the site limits it to either leery advertisers, or people like JList (where 4channers are almost exactly their target audience). So advertising has always been hard for 4chan.
Personally, I think the 4chan pass is the key way to move forward for 4chan, or solicit donations more openly (perhaps a progress bar that shows % of monthly fees that have been paid?).
Funding 4chan is definitely a hard problem, but it has existed for more than a decade, and has been mostly well-handled for that entire period. Time will tell, though.