In the broad range of organizations that question the expanding role of marketing in public life, a group called the Anti-Advertising Agency Foundation For Freedom stands among the most ardently opposed to the traditional but uneasy co-existence of advertising and the editorial craft.

But the AAAFFF is the only one we know of that is willing to pay advertisers not to ply their trade, through an award that offers "creative freedom" and a "giant check." So says the press release:

CHICAGO -- The most creative and forward-thinking professionals of our time work in marketing. The Anti-Advertising Agency Foundation For Freedom wants them to quit. And they're offering cash.

The AAAFFF was organized by Steve Lambert and Anne Elizabeth Moore, both of whom have much to say about the world of marketing -- some of it tongue-in-cheek, some quite serious.

Their work to eliminate advertising in  grocery stores across the country and bus stops in Oakland has garnered national attention. Which, presumably, is the point. The group aims to question the role of advertising in public space "through constructive parody and gentle humor."

"Our work will de-normalize 'out-of-home' advertising and increase awareness of the public’s power to contribute to a more democratically-based outdoor environment," says its mission statement.

The contest might not solve the great debate, but it’s a start to rid the streets and cyberspace of mental clutter. The contest aims to do this one person at a time. Providing "tips, training, and networking opportunities" and the Anti-Advertising Agency says that it has known "you've always wanted to devote yourself solely to those pursuits."

On May 9, Moore updated readers on the progress of the Foundation For Freedom contest with some excerpts from respondents. This one in particular spoke to the goals of the Public Press project, in creating a culture of unmediated and civic-minded journalism:

I have worked for the past 4 years (since I graduated from a very prestigious culinary school) doing R&D for a food manufacturer ... Boy, throwing away 5,000 pre-packaged hamburger buns when they don't get used is even more egregious when you wake up to CNN telling you that people are rioting in Haiti and Egypt because they can't afford a loaf of bread. Poor people are so silly. I'm all ready to quit my job so that I can devote my time to the theatre which is my true love ... -- Midwestern Ad Man

Lambert's resumeof art projects and published work is thought-provoking, as is Moore's work with independent publishing. Neither is primarily focused on journalism, but their efforts to get a consumerism-drenched culture to consider alternatives is inspiring.

It's the same old song, second verse: The old ways of paying for quality journalism are slowly dying and will continue to decline until a new model that works has been created. Though what the best news model looks like is always up for discussion.

American Journalism Review's senior editor, Carl Sessions Stepp, wrote a bulleted list of ways to succeed with the new newspaper. "Maybe it Is Time to Panic," Stepp says.

A few highlights:

• Make it better not worse
• Make it astonishingly, irresistibly better
• Make it easier, not harder, to use and enjoy
• Involve everyone from school kids to staff members to senior subscribers in the ultimate group science project of creating the greatest news outlets imaginable

Hey, he's singing our song!

Nonprofit and noncommercial journalism dovetail nicely with the outline Stepp provides. Like the other leading journalism publications, Columbia Journalism Review and Quill, AJR has long been hunting for solutions to the business-model mess. In 2004 Stepp spent some time at the St. Petersburg Times (owned by the nonprofit Poynter Institute) and NPR, and wrote in a forward-thinking piece titled, "Journalism Without Profit Margins," that the staff working in nonprofit newsrooms seem to have an enhanced "shared ethic and enthusiasm" to make the product the best it can be. In that piece, Stepp wrote:

My own observation, based on years of working in, visiting and studying news operations, is that noncommercial journalists have no monopoly on commitment or quality. Large media corporations have the resources and clout for in-depth coverage, investigations and enterprise. No matter who pays their salaries, journalists tend by tribal habit to be aggressive, competitive and mindful of public service.

Yet in visiting less-commercial newsrooms and interviewing their journalists, I was struck by the palpable sense of relief and liberation, the exhilaration of professional autonomy.

When journalists feel in control, audiences gain something extra and special: news, analysis and opinion tailored to community and civic needs by professionals who care deeply.

Following up on these observations by writing a laundry list of ways to improve newspapers is a start. But the time to implement new ideas is now. Let's hope that "panic" is only the first emotional response to dealing with this crisis, not the last.

The Boston Globe is the latest Top 30 newspaper to use alternative methods to gathering news. For the Sunday Globe it was eight journalism graduate students from Northeastern University for a Page One piece "advocating for senior citizens."