Listen to the naysayers, and the newspaper business is doomed. Declining advertising revenue, floundering circulation, and a recalcitrant unwillingness among readers to — gasp — pay for news.

So what’s next?

Despite being a young journalist who reads blogs, voraciously consumes news, and is passionate about the role of journalism in a free society, it would be disingenuous for me to claim any sort of prescience.

While the industry’s present state clearly doesn’t augur well for the future of newspaper journalism, I see print circulation leveling off after its sharp drop and Internet news picking up some of the readership slack. Besides that, I can’t really speculate without echoing other equally speculative prognostications out there.

In such a climate, just a few things are certain: Everyone’s uncertain where the newspaper business is headed, the vast majority of people are mortified, and, most importantly, the industry is essential to a liberal democracy.

Maybe not in its current form, but in some form.

Without accurate information and rational discourse, democracy is reduced to a bastardized form of its ideal self: tyranny of the masses. Sure, the United States survived through the 19th century with a largely sensationalist, partisan press. But can anyone argue with a straight face that our inchoate democracy benefited because of it? Was our nation’s citizenry enhanced by the rampant yellow journalism?

Our society is already dumbed-down from mass infotainment consumption, consumerism, and omnipresent advertising. Corporate conglomeration of media outlets has also partially neutered the press’s efficacy and stifled diversity of opinion. But a complete collapse of the press would have a disastrous effect on the country.

Some have suggested that the role of newspapers is overblown, that America wouldn’t miss them in the slightest. Maybe they’re right. But a model that nurtures a free, liberal democratic society — engaging and informing citizens, and practicing Fourth Estate-style investigative journalism — would have to fill that potential void.

America as a nation wouldn’t die. It’d just be a little more opaque, a little less democratic. Business and commerce could continue — and so could the collection of news. But, devoid of contextual or analytical value, it would be less meaningful and less useful to critically minded citizens.

As mentioned above, the news business’s future model is unclear. But whatever the new paradigm, a few of things remain essential: a press corps that holds elected officials, corporate leaders, and companies accountable; provides vital, objective information to citizens; and provides a space for rational discussion of critical issues.

As the venerated journalist Walter Lippmann once said, “A long life in journalism convinced me many presidents ago that there should be a large air space between a journalist and the head of a state.” So, too, should be the relationship between journalists and government officials. I’m just a tad perturbed by the notion that there won’t an accountability mechanism for citizens in the future (i.e., a vibrant press).

Here at the DI Opinions page, we don’t claim to be the saviors of democracy. But we’ll continue striving to provide a forum for the community and university.

At its best, a well-balanced, informative opinions page is the antithesis of the cacophonous world of talk radio and cable news that too often centers on talking heads rather than rational discussion.

While the other sections of the DI are tasked with objectively informing students and community members and providing a check on local leaders, our role is to advance critical thinking and discussion.

That’s where you, the reader comes in. If you have constructive criticism or informed comments, shoot us an e-mail our submit a guest opinion.

Think of it as your role as a citizen savior of American democracy.