I can think of two other models: philanthropically-backed and state-sponsored. Both have readily apparent issues guaranteeing trust in their independence from their source of funding.
We can certainly tinker around with any of these models, but I've been kicking an idea for alternative model. I've been searching in vain for an example of this, but it'd be a variant on a worker-owned cooperative. Let's imagine something called a "stakeholder-owned media cooperative" with three tiers of engagement:
1) Producer-owners (journalists, editors, etc) 2) Subscribers-owners (readers who pay dues in exchange for editorial input) 3) Readers
Just to spitball some numbers: at $20/mo in dues, 300 subscriber-owners could support one producer-owner at $72,000. The incentive to join as a dues-paying member would be a voting stake in the editorial direction of the outlet. You could play with the variables to balance power in a way that is appealing to both parties: perhaps producer-owners get veto power, or can limit the set of options for editorial direction, or perhaps weight the votes.
The primary goals would be twofold: 1) more closely align editorial incentives of news producers and owners 2) produce a positive externality: news that can also be consumed by passive readers, who could apply to become subscriber-owners if they cared about the editorial direction.
As far as I know, nothing like this exists, but it'd be really interesting to have a kickstart-like platform for jumpstarting this sort of organization: if a certain threshold of subscriber-owners signs on (with their credit card, perhaps paying a year's subscription up front to limit financial uncertainty) then the organization is free to begin building.
Anyhow, just one potential model. I'd be fascinated to find anyone who's tried something like this